THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 LIBRARY 
 
 Self 
 
Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. A 
 charge is made on all overdue 
 books. r T T u 
 
 U. of I. Library 
 
 HUH 2i ,'34? 
 
 M32 
 
PRICB TBN CBNT8 
 
 PLAIN FACTS 
 
 FAIR MINDS 
 
 AN APPEAL TO CANDOR 
 
 GEORGE M. SEARLE 
 
 Priest of the Congregation of St. Paul the Apostle; Professor tf 
 Mathematics and Astronomy in the Catholi^ University 
 of America and Director of the Observatory 
 
 569 THOUSAND 
 
 New York 
 THE COLUMBUS PRESS 
 1 20 West 60th Street 
 
 1911 
 
AUGUSTINUS F. HEWIT, S.T.D., 
 
 Censor Deputatus^ 
 
 IFmprimatur : 
 
 MICHAEIv AUGUSTINUS, 
 
 Archiep, Neo Ebor, 
 
 XV Mart, i8gj. 
 
 '^pPYRIGHT, 189J, BY *'ThK MISSIONARY SOCIEJTY OB 
 SX. PauI the ApOSTI^e; IN THE STATE 
 
 OF New York." 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 ^TIHIS book has been written, not With the 
 ^ view of controversy, but of simply stat- 
 ing the Catholic doctrine. In these days 
 there seems little need of controversy on 
 our part with the majority, at least, of 
 Protestant Christians ; for their belief mainly 
 consists of remnants of our own, and so far 
 are we from objecting to it, that we thank 
 God that they have preserved such impor- 
 tant parts of His revelation as are the dog- 
 mas of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the 
 •Redemption of man by the great Sacrifice 
 of the Cross. Some tenets they have, no 
 doubt, which we cannot approve, but these 
 are generally regarded as non-essential, and 
 are losing their hold even in the churches 
 which nominally maintain them. What they 
 prize, we also teach. „ 
 
 They, however, are not tired of contro- 
 versy. The very essence of Protestantism is 
 in protesting against the Catholic Church. 
 
 250530 
 
Iv 
 
 Preface. 
 
 I >s 'beginning these protests were based 
 on really divergent beliefs; but- now they 
 are principally directed against what has no 
 real existence. Those who make them are, 
 for the most part, as we Catholics well 
 know, simply fighting a man of straw; a 
 creature of their own imagination, and of the 
 false traditions received from their ancestors. 
 The only way in which their objections can 
 be answered, except by such examples of vir- 
 tue as we can show, is by plain statements 
 cf what our belief really is. If they can be 
 induced to listen to us, and to believe that 
 we actually teach and Jiold what we say we 
 do, as every instinct of fairness and candor 
 and honesty would compel them to do in 
 any other question ; if they will take our doc- 
 trine from our own account of it, not from 
 those of others prejudiced like themselves, 
 we need not fear the outcome. 
 
 There seems at the present time to be a 
 better disposition than formerly on the part 
 of those outside to listen to our own state- 
 ments about our faith, rather than to thoefe 
 coming from second-hand sources. What is 
 said in these pages has, of course, been said 
 
Preface. 
 
 V 
 
 before; but perhaps it may fall now on 
 more willing ears and more candid minds. 
 
 In these pages the truth of the Christian 
 religion is practically assumed. This book 
 is not intended to prove the existence of 
 God, or the fact of a Divine revelation to 
 the atheist, the agnostic, or the infidel. 
 Neither is it directed against such as may 
 believe in some revelation additional or sup- 
 plementary to that given to us by Christ ; 
 nor does it deal with every theory regard- 
 ing the Church which may be held — as, for 
 example, that of the Anglicans. It is ad- 
 dressed principally to what are commonly 
 called Bible Christians, who form the major* 
 ity of our Protestant population, in order to 
 show them that the Catholic religion, while 
 thoroughly in accordance with Scripture and 
 based on it, also agrees with reason and 
 ccunmon sense, and has nothing to fear 
 from the discoveries or legitimate conclu- 
 sions of science ; that having the historical 
 presumption in its favor, it also in every 
 other way satisfies the demands of the intel- 
 lect, as well as the needs of the soul. And 
 to show the reasonableness of what is really 
 
vi Preface. 
 
 the only thoroughly reasonable form of 
 Christianity may not be altogether unprofit- 
 able even to others also, of whatever kind 
 their belief or unbelief may be. 
 
 It may be added, in further explanation 
 of the plan of the work, that though, as 
 has been said, it is not intended as an at- 
 tack on distinctively Protestant doctrines, it 
 has seemed best at the outset to compare 
 the Catholic idea of Christianity with the 
 usual Protestant theory basing religion on 
 the Bible alone. The creed of the Catholic 
 Church is then set forth point by point ; the 
 order here followed is that of the profession 
 of faith made by converts, each point of this 
 profession being separately considered, and 
 the common objections and misccnceptions 
 dealt with. In conclusion, other charges 
 against the Church not suggested by the 
 profession, but often made by those who do 
 not know us, are discussed and shown also 
 to rest on prejudice or misunderstanding. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chmpter Bag* 
 
 I.— Introductory, i 
 
 II. — Bible Protestantism, . . . i6 
 
 III. — The Catholic Idea of Christian- 
 
 ity, 29 
 
 IV. — The Infallibility of the Pope, . 36 
 V. — The Catholic Idea of the Bible, 50 
 
 VI. — The principal Points of Catholic 
 
 Faith, 59 
 
 VII. — The Blessed Virgin Mary, . . 74 
 
 VIII. — The Immaculate Conception, . 82 
 
 IX.— The Holy Eucharist, ... 87 
 X.— The Seven Sacraments, . . .101 
 
 XI. — Purgatory, 11 1 
 
 XII. — The Resurrection of the Dead ; 
 
 Everlasting Life, . . . 132 
 
 XIII. — The Primacy of the Roman Pon- 
 
 tiff, 143 
 
 XIV. — Catholic Education, . . .151 
 XV. — The Veneration of the Saints, 
 
 AND OF their IMAGES, . . 162 
 
 XVI. — The Remainder of the Profes- 
 
 sion, 185 
 
 XVII. — The Precepts of the Church, . 198 
 XVIIL — Indulgences and Dispensations, 221 
 
 Tii 
 
via 
 
 Contents, 
 
 Chapter Page 
 
 XIX.— Confession, 233 
 
 XX. — The Celibacy of the Clergy, . 244 
 XXI.— Modern Miracles, . . .251 
 XXII. — Superstition, 268 
 
 XXIII. — The Church opposed to Science, 274 
 
 XXIV. — The Church opposed to Liberty 
 
 OF Thought, .... 285 
 XXV. — The Catholic Church opposed 
 
 TO Free Institutions, . . 298 
 
 XXVI. — Persecution, 307 
 
 XXVII. — The Catholic Laws of Marriage, 321 
 
 XXVIII. — Use of the Latin Language, . 331 
 XXIX. — Ceremonies and Rites of the 
 
 Church, 338 
 
 XXX.— The Good and the Bad in the , 
 
 Church, 343 
 
 XXXI. — Conclusion, . ...» 352 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY, 
 
 I ADDRESS these pages in general to those 
 who love the truth, and who wish to know 
 it ; more specially to those who believe, as com- 
 mon sense must require us to believe, that the 
 most important part of all truth is that which 
 relates to man's duty here, and his destiny 
 hereafter; but particularly to those who are 
 convinced that this last, religious truth, or the 
 true religion, is to be found somewhere or other 
 in what is known as Christianity ; or in other 
 words, that the religion founded by Christ con- 
 tains all that man can know on these most im- 
 portant matters. 
 
 Some do not believe that anything can be 
 known about these matters except what the light 
 of nature shows us ; with such, of course, dis- 
 cussion is quite possible, but I do not propose to 
 enter on it. Many others believe that the true, 
 or at any rate the truest religion is not that of 
 Christ, but some other; but though there are 
 plenty of this sort in the world, there are not so 
 many here ; few Americans are Mohammedans, 
 or even Buddhists ; so I pass them by, and turn 
 
2 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 to the multitude, who still are, by inheritance 
 and by profession, Christians. 
 
 And yet, after all, considerations presented on 
 this basis may not be altogether beside the 
 mark for those who do not stand on it. For 
 the reason why they refuse to stand on it may 
 well be that the Christian creed seems to them 
 unreasonable and impossible ; but that may be 
 simply because their knowledge of it is very in- 
 complete ; because they have known it as it has 
 been handed down to them from their fathers, 
 but not as it has been believed by the great 
 majority of those who, from the time of Christ, 
 have lived and died in it. 
 
 It may be well, then, even for those who have 
 rejected Christianity, as they have understood 
 ity to examine if they have been right or 
 thoroughly reasonable in so doing. 
 
 Would it be reasonable or fair to reject the 
 whole science of medicine because you have 
 concluded that some form of it which you have 
 studied is a mistake ? lyct us, then, not reject 
 Christianity for good and all until we are sure 
 we know all about it ; and certainly not if we 
 are quite ignorant or doubtful about what the 
 great mass of Christians hold. 
 
 There are vast numbers — you are perhaps one 
 yourself — who are in just this ignorance or 
 doubt. It is simply astonishing that there 
 should be two hundred millions of people hold- 
 
Introductory. j 
 
 ing one faith, and spread through all parts of 
 the world, and yet that their neighbors, friends, 
 or even relatives, with whom so much of their 
 life is spent, should be in such ignorance of 
 what that faith is, or have such false ideas 
 about it. Especially as these two hundred 
 millions do not form a secret society, with secret 
 meetings, signs, and passwords ; no, everything 
 that they hold and teach is open and above- 
 board ; they are not Freemasons, they are simply 
 Catholics. 
 
 It was so, however, from the beginning; we 
 were accused of worshipping an ass's head, and 
 of slaughtering infants ; but then there was 
 more excuse for such calumnies, for there was, 
 there had to be, some secrecy in our meetings 
 then ; but now there is very little ; every one is 
 welcome to every religious meeting of Catho- 
 lics, except to that between priest and penitent 
 in the confessional ; you yourself would not 
 want strangers, or indeed any third party, at 
 that. 
 
 But I do not wish to blame any one for being 
 thus ignorant, if he will only admit that perhaps 
 he is so ; for I should have to blame myself ; 
 having been once as ignorant myself, and yet 
 fancying I knew it all. But that was somp time 
 ago. 
 
 Well now, we will come back to the line on 
 
4 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 which we started. We will suppose that you 
 are a Christian, or at least would like to be so 
 if you could see your way to it without giving 
 up your reason or your moral sense, or going 
 through some great excitement, which you fee] 
 you cannot work yourself up to. 
 
 And here let me say a word to dispel a de- 
 lusion which has become quite popular of late. 
 It is that religion is a matter of emotion or ex- 
 citement ; that there is some incompatibility 
 between it and strict logic ; that a religious man, 
 and especially a clergyman, must be a man of 
 feeling, rather than of solid hard-headed fact. 
 That religion, in short, is a sentiment rather 
 than a science; that it is fit for women and 
 children, and does them a great deal of good ; 
 and would no doubt do a man good too, if he 
 could only bend his gigantic intellect to it. 
 
 Now, this idea would be simply amusing to 
 any one who knows anything about the Catholic 
 religion, if it were not a dangerous one, and 
 therefore liable to make one sigh as well as 
 smile. In the first place, the part of it relating 
 to women is rather a bold assumption which 
 perhaps we cannot hold to much longer ; I have 
 a suspicion that perhaps women have more 
 sense than some men imagine, and that we had 
 better not be too confident that we are so much 
 more clever than they, even in an argument. 
 
 But let that go. The amusing part is the 
 
Introductory, 
 
 5 
 
 utter misconception of what religion really is. 
 True, it is a matter of emotion ; and of senti- 
 ment, if you choose to call it so. And it would 
 not be good for anything if it were not. A 
 religion which was' simply a set of mathematical 
 formulas might appeal to a man's brain, but it 
 would not change his life. 
 
 But the emotion of true religion must rest on 
 a solid basis of truth, fact, and reason. The 
 true religion, at bottom, is not imagination, but 
 knowledge ; and knowledge, not of one fact or 
 another, isolated or disjointed, but logically 
 connected and thoroughly consistent ; with no 
 paradoxes or absurdities in it; knowledge, in 
 short, of the kind that is properly called science. 
 It is as truly a scienee as any one of the ex- 
 cellent branches of knowledge which are so 
 named ; diflferent, however, to some extent from 
 most of them in the way it is developed; and 
 from all of them, in being of all the most impor- 
 tant. 
 
 If you ask seriously, why, if this is the case, 
 women and children take more to religion than 
 men ? — I am afraid the true reason is that re- 
 ligion has rather an intimate connection with 
 morality, and that women and children, as 
 things are now, take more kindly to that. A 
 life of solid virtue is the best preparation foi 
 religious truth ; but still, every one can receive 
 it, if only he will ; and a man if he is virtuous, 
 
6 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 ppt to be very solidly so. Virtue, by the 
 way, really means, in the Latin from which it 
 is taken, manliness ; it would be well for all 
 men to think of that. 
 
 Try, then, to free yourself from this idea, 
 rather prevalent at present, that reason and 
 religion do not go together ; or what comes to 
 about the same thing, that they are two separate 
 apartments of the mind, and that you must step 
 out of one befcrre going into the other. Indeed, 
 is this idea, in itself, reasonable ? You know 
 that both reason and religion are worth having ; 
 indeed the first is obviously indispensable, and 
 the second, you must at least acknowledge, has 
 done and is doing a great deal of good, and you 
 cannot shake off the rCvSpect you have for it 
 when it seems to be genuine. You feel that at 
 any rate there is some truth about it ; and if 
 you would think a little harder, you would see 
 that what there is true about it cannot be incon- 
 sistent with reason, for two truths cannot be in- 
 consistent. It cannot be necessary to abandon 
 one before taking up the other. ' 
 
 I say, you feel that there must be some truth 
 about religion ; and I use the word ' ' truth ' ' in 
 its strict sense, as meaning a correct statement 
 of facts. Perhaps you deny this. But you 
 must at least admit that every religion rests on 
 some statements which it holds to be true ; 
 some dogmas, as such statements in the matter 
 
Introductory. 
 
 7 
 
 of religion are properly called. It is merely 
 nonsense to talk about a religion without any 
 dogmas. The very emotion which you perhaps 
 think the principal part of religion must rest on 
 them. One can't get excited or deeply moved 
 about nothing. Even a lunatic is joyful or 
 melancholy about something ; something which 
 he thinks is a fact, though we may see clearly 
 that he is all wrong about it. 
 
 Take away the dogmas of any religion, and 
 there is nothing left of it. Excitement and 
 emotion may be all very well ; but there must 
 be something to get excited and emotional 
 abqut. 
 
 Excitement and emotion, then, rest on some 
 supposed fact. I said just now that they may 
 be all very well; but they are not very well, 
 indeed, they are not well at all in the long run, 
 if the supposed fact is only a supposed one. 
 They are really only a sort of lunacy, and more 
 or less dangerous. 
 
 You have no respect for lunacy, but you have 
 for the Christian religion ; and generally speak- 
 ing, you do not regard it as dangerous, but 
 rather good for society. You are a Christian, 
 or you would like to be so if you could see your 
 way to it ; but surely you do not call yourself 
 a lunatic, or want to be one. 
 
 What is the reason ? It is that you have 
 sense enough to see not only that the emotion 
 
8 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 of the Christian religion, which you know tends 
 tc virtue and happiness, and which you your- 
 self may have felt, must and does rest on some 
 fact or facts supposed to be true, but also that 
 you are pretty sure that this supposition is not 
 altogether wrong. 
 
 Here you are, then, right face to face with a 
 question which you ought not to trifle with. 
 Five minutes' thought will bring you, and 
 must, it would seem, bring any man of ordin- 
 arily clear head, up to it. But most men seem 
 to go no farther. 
 
 The question is, how much of the Christian 
 religion is true ? Some of it must be true ; but 
 how much ? Some of its dogmas must be cor- 
 rect ; which are they ? 
 
 Mind, as I said at the beginning, I am not 
 talking to Buddhists or Mohammedans ; nor to 
 absolute atheists, if such persons there be, nor 
 to universal sceptics ; but to those who call 
 themselves Christians, or would like to do so. 
 
 Now, if the Christian religion, or anything 
 calling itself so, undertakes to teach you that two 
 and two make five, of course you can't accept 
 that. We can't dethrone reason to make way 
 for religion, or for anything else. Or if it 
 should teach you that the world was made in 
 six days of twenty-four hours each, I can cer- 
 tainly see that you may find that quite hard to 
 believe. Of course that might be so ; I take 
 
r 
 
 Introductory, 
 
 9 
 
 for granted that you believe in God, and if you 
 do believe in Him, and therefore in His omni- 
 potence, you must see that He could make all 
 these formations on the earth, which seem to 
 have been the growth of time, in six days, or in 
 six minutes, or in six seconds ; but still, such 
 action on His part would seem like a trick 
 played to deceive us, and I can readily see how 
 you would rather look somewhere else for the 
 truth. 
 
 Now, perhaps you think that the Christian 
 religion does require beliefs of you which are 
 contrary to reason, or to well-ascertained fact. 
 But if you do, this is just where I blame you. 
 Why don't you examine a little or even a good 
 deal more, and not conclude that you know all 
 about it ? 
 
 But you say, where shall I examine? where 
 shall I begin ? The Christian religion is split 
 up into so many denominations, and teaches so 
 many different things, even irreconcilable with 
 each other, that I don't know what I am to look 
 at first. 
 
 Well, of course if you have been brought up 
 in any particular one of these denominations, it 
 is quite natural that you should examine first 
 into that. But if you have done' so, and have 
 found the result unsatisfactory ; or if you want 
 to approach the subject, as it were, from the out- 
 
lO 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 side, it seems more natural that you should now 
 look first at what the majority of Christians 
 hold ; at any rate, that you should not make up 
 your mind without doing this ; that you should 
 not, as I said at the start, close the subject 
 because you cannot accept what some compara- 
 tively small number believe, and conclude that 
 the faith of the great remainder is substantially 
 the same, or, at any rate, equally untenable. 
 
 It seems natural, too, to look, and to look first, 
 into the belief of that great body of believers 
 which has, in its organization and outward form 
 at least, come down from the first days of the 
 Christian religion itself; which goes by the 
 name of no human founder or reformer. Of 
 course this great body, this parent stock of 
 Christianity, may have corrupted or changed the 
 faith which Christ gave it in the beginning; 
 may have introduced something false or im- 
 moral, or at any rate merely human, into that 
 faith ; may have usurped powers which do not 
 belong to it; may have done something, in 
 short, which it was right to protest against, and 
 have acted in such a way that the only effectual 
 protest was to abandon it, and start in a manner 
 afresh. But it is not reasonable to take for 
 granted that it did so. The burden of proof 
 rather rests on those who claim that such was 
 the case. 
 
 A.nd it is not quite fair to take their own 
 
Introductory. 
 
 II 
 
 accounts of the reasons which led them to separ- 
 ate ; of the doctrines which the Catholic Church 
 taught, and still teaches, which they say they 
 could not swallow. Better and fairer to find 
 out if they might not have been mistaken, to 
 say the least. When a son leaves his father's 
 house after some quarrel, you don't simply take 
 his word about the quarrel ; it is only fair to 
 see what account the father will give of it. In- 
 deed, generally the presumption is in his favor. 
 
 Do not, then, believe implicitly all that you 
 have been accustomed to hear about the corrup- 
 tions, errors, idolatries, etc., of the old and 
 original Christian Church. I do not blame you 
 much if you have done so hitherto ; the false, 
 and to Catholics really absurd, current notions 
 about our faith have been held and circulated 
 so constantly among Protestants that it can 
 hardly be a matter of surprise that most non- 
 Catholics take them for granted. 
 
 All I ask of you is to admit that the question 
 may have two sides to it. The difl&culty is that 
 most Englishmen and Americans, in making up 
 their minds as to whether they can be Chris- 
 tians, bar oflf the Catholic Church at the start 
 from their inquiry. They take for granted that 
 she is wrong ; they feel as sure of this as they 
 do that the earth goes round the sun, not the 
 sun round the earth. They think both these 
 
12 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 matters were settled three hundred years 
 ago. 
 
 What! they will say, **be a Catholic? 
 Why, you might as well go in for astrology, or 
 hold that everything is made up of the four ele- 
 ments, earth, air, fire, and water. Why, the 
 thing is exploded ; it is a relic of the dark ages ; 
 it is just a superstition which no intelligent man 
 can hang on to. It is a wonder that it has such 
 a hold in this glorious nineteenth (and almost 
 twentieth) century.*' 
 
 All they will admit is, that this superstition 
 may be of some use to poor ignorant people, 
 who are too brutish or stupid to accept anything 
 better; the consolation they give themselves 
 when some friend of theirs does embrace this 
 old and foolish religion, and perhaps even be- 
 comes a priest, to teach it to others, is, Well, 
 after all, you will be able to do some good to 
 those poor people whom we cannot get hold 
 of.'* 
 
 How often do we hear such things said, even 
 to our face ! But in spite of this seeming confi- 
 dence of superiority, there is one thing that 
 surprises them, and that they do not like to 
 talk about ; and that is, that it is rather the 
 educated and intelligent ones among them that 
 become Catholics, whereas it is among the 
 poorer and more ignorant among us that they 
 find ones of whom they get hold It looks as if 
 
Introductory, 
 
 13 
 
 the Catholic faith were more attractive to in- 
 telligent people than the Protestant one ; or 
 rather, it would look so if that were not, of 
 course, too impossible an idea to be entertained. 
 
 Another thing, too, seems a little strange : that 
 some inducement in the way of material aid or 
 social position seems usually required to make a 
 Catholic abandon his faith ; whereas the Protes- 
 tant who becomes a Catholic has, as a rule, 
 to sacrifice something for his convictions. It 
 looks, you see, as if the convictions were 
 stronger one way than the other. 
 
 Of course.it may be said in explanation of the 
 first of these two curious facts, by those who are 
 willing to admit them as facts, that the intel- 
 ligent Protestants who become Catholics are 
 what are known at the present day as * * cranks ' ' ; 
 that they are not people of plain common sense, 
 but students who have puzzled themselves by 
 reasoning, or fanciful persons whose imagina- 
 tion has been excited. This was what Festus 
 said to St. Paul (Acts xxvi. 24) : Paul, thou 
 art beside thyself ; much learning doth make 
 thee mad.'* Paul, however, has generally been 
 accepted, even by those who are not Christians, 
 as a man of good sound intellect, to say the 
 least. And converts to Catholicity generally, 
 even in our times, manage to keep out of the 
 asylum, in spite of their friends' predictions to 
 the contrary. 
 
14 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 To the second, it will be urged that Catho- 
 lics must gain and Protestants lose by a 
 change, because Protestants are as a whole bet- 
 ter oflF, financially and socially, than Catholics. 
 This is true ; but still it does not explain why 
 the convert to the Catholic Church should make 
 the sacrifice which he does, or why Protestants, 
 having presumably the truth, and certainly the 
 Inoney in their possession, should have such 
 unsatisfactory results in their apostolate among 
 well-instructed Catholics. 
 
 Now, all I would ask is that you would, just 
 for a moment, admit that there may be some 
 good solid reasons which have influenced the 
 many quite intellectual and sensible Protes- 
 tants who have become Catholics to make the 
 change, in spite of the sacrifice which it in- 
 volved . 
 
 And r may add, that it may be worth while 
 even for those who have almost lost faith in 
 Christianity, as being out of harmony with rea- 
 son, to see if there is not a chance that some- 
 thing still remains to be said on the other side ; 
 to inquire, before giving up altogether, whether 
 there be not a form of Christianity about which 
 they know little or nothing, though they have 
 always supposed it to be quite irrational and 
 inadmissible, which after all may be not only 
 reasonable in itself, but also in accordance with 
 
Introductory, 
 
 15 
 
 all the progress of the age, and all the discover- 
 ies of modern science. 
 
 It is to this form of Christianity, accepted as 
 the true one by the great mass of those who call 
 themselves Christians, and understood well by 
 them, though a mystery to you, that I propose 
 very shortly to invite your attention. - I^et us 
 not only admit that it may be true, but see 
 just what it is, and if there is any good reason 
 why it should not be true. 
 
 But first let us find out what is the inherent 
 weakness of the Christian systems to which you 
 have been accustomed ; why it is that they can- 
 not reasonably command your assent, as being 
 based on an unreasonable assumption. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 BIBI,^ PROTESTANTISM. 
 
 HAT is the assumption of which I have 
 just spoken, which I say is the cause 
 of the weakness of Christianity as generally 
 understood by Englishmen and Americans, and 
 which to some extent justifies them in thinking, 
 as I have said many do think, that religion is a 
 matter of the heart, not of the head ; that it 
 commends itself to our sentiments, but not to 
 our rational nature ? 
 
 It is that the Bible is the sole foundation on 
 which the Christian religion must rest ; not only 
 that it is the Word of God, from Genesis to 
 Revelation, but that nothing else is the word 
 of God. 
 
 Before proceeding farther, I would ask you to 
 observe the precise point here noted. It is not 
 that the Bible is an inspired book, and the only 
 inspired book recognized by Christians ; for in 
 that the Catholic Church agrees with Protes- 
 tants, except that she recognizes as belonging 
 to the Bible a few books which are also known 
 and read by Protestants, which though some- 
 times given in their Bibles, and used by them in 
 their churches, are considered of doubtful or of 
 
 x6 
 
Bible Pra$€Siantism. 
 
 17 
 
 merely human authority. So we cannot com- 
 plain of their considering the Bible as God's 
 Word ; for all that they recognize as such, we 
 also recognize in like manner. 
 
 It is true that there is a certain unreasonable- 
 ness, which I shall speak of shortly, in Protes- 
 tants maintaining that just these writings are 
 inspired which they have selected for their 
 Bible ; in their feeling sure that every one of 
 them is inspired from beginning to end, and 
 that no other writing is. Catholics have a rea- 
 son for confidence in their Bible, as will appear 
 later on ; but Protestants have none except the 
 general acceptance of these writings by Chris- 
 tians, unless they fall back on the proof which 
 we employ ; but to do so would remove the 
 whole basis of Protestantism itself, as will be 
 seen when we come to speak of that proof. 
 
 But still belief in the Bible is not in itself a 
 fault in Protestants ; on the contrary, though it 
 is somewhat illogical in them, we should and do 
 thank God that they have retained it ; and we 
 wish it to be distinctly understood that Catho- 
 lics have the same belief in and reverence for it 
 that they have, and even more, as based on a 
 more sufiicient reason. We, even more than 
 they, regard it as the Word of God, inspired by 
 Him, and of conclusive authority in matters of 
 religion. Our sermons, like those of Protes- 
 tants, are founded, as a rule, on its text, and de- 
 
1 8 Bible Protestantism. 
 
 voted to an explanation of its meaning. Oui 
 people are recommended to read it with the 
 reverent and careful attention which so holy a 
 book requires and deserves. 
 
 That the Bible is, then, a foundation, and a 
 great and certain foundation, of the Christian 
 religion is not the assumption which is the prin- 
 cipal weakness of Protestantism ; though in a 
 sense, as being with them an unreasonable 
 assumption, it is a weakness too. But after all, 
 a belief, even though not well or logically 
 established in a man's mind, is good if it be 
 really true ; nothing false or ruinous is going to 
 come from it ; on the other hand, it has in itself • 
 the germs of strength and Hie. 
 
 This, then, is not the dangerous assumption 
 which has split Protestantism into so many 
 sects, and made it incapable of commanding the 
 rational assent of man. It is not the belief that 
 the Bible is a sure foundation for the Christian 
 religion that has done the harm ; no, it is the 
 belief that it is its sole foundation. 
 
 This belief is absolutely unreasonable ; for it 
 is either demonstrably false, or destructive of 
 Christianity itself. Taken in the sense that it 
 is the only foundation Christianity ever had, it 
 is clearly false. In the sense that it is the only 
 one now remaining, the foundation it gives is ob- 
 viously inadequate ; Christianity becomes some- 
 thing which once existed, but which has passed 
 
Bible Protestantism. 
 
 19 
 
 into oblivion ; it is as hopeless for us to acquire 
 a sufficient knowledge of it as it would be to 
 know thoroughly the manners and customs of 
 the ancient Assyrians. We cannot tell whether 
 some parts of our religion have not perished, 
 quite as important and essential as those which 
 the Bible contains. Practically, then, it is de- 
 stroyed; it exists simply as a wreck. 
 
 Let us examine these two statements, and see 
 if they are not correct. The first one is, that the 
 Bible cannot have been the only foundation that 
 =ever existed for Christianity. 
 
 This is, we may say, self-evident ; that is, it 
 requires only the most elementary knowledge 
 of history to make it clear to any one. At the 
 time when the apostles set out to preach the 
 gospel, and convert the world, the Old Testa- 
 ment was the only part of the Bible that had 
 been written. But evidently it was not the Old 
 Testament which they preached, though they 
 certainly used it to confirm their preaching, in 
 very much the same way, it may be remarked, 
 that the Catholic Church uses the whole Bible 
 to-day. 
 
 No ; the bulk of their preaching was their 
 own personal testimony to the great revelation 
 which had been committed to their care. 
 They spoke, as SS. Peter and John said (Acts 
 iv. 20), the things which they had seen and 
 heard; as St. John says more explicitly 
 
Bible Protestantism. 
 
 (I. John i. 3) , That which we have seen and 
 have heard, we declare unto you/' They had 
 no need of written documents to remind them 
 of these wonderful events, which, even had they 
 tried, they could not forget. 
 
 And it was on their personal testimony, 
 supported by the miracles which they worked, 
 and which made it evident that the Holy Ghost 
 was speaking by their lips, that their converts, 
 the first Christians, believed in Christ. They 
 read no Bible ; they needed none. 
 
 After a while, one by one, the books of the 
 New Testament were written by six of the apos- 
 tles, Peter, Paul, Matthew, John, James, and 
 Jude, and by two of their companions, Mark 
 and Luke. The four Gospels were written to 
 put in a permanent form the principal events 
 of our Lord's life and death, to give an au- 
 thentic record of it for posterity, and also for 
 the use of those who, even in the times of the 
 apostles themselves, might have occasion to in- 
 struct others in it, and who had not perhaps the 
 advantage of being eye-witnesses of what they 
 had to tell, and at any rate not the special 
 Divine assistance promised to the apostles them- 
 selves. 
 
 But these Gospels were necessarily incom- 
 plete accounts of the great matter of which they 
 treated; St. John himself says, in the close' 
 of his, that there are also many other things 
 
Bible Protestantism. 
 
 21 
 
 that Jesus did,'* and to show that he does not 
 mean merely the things narrated by the other 
 evangelists, but not by himself, he adds, that if 
 all were written, the world could not contain the 
 books. 
 
 It is impossible, of course, to take these 
 words literally; but still they mean a great 
 deal. And let it not be said now, that 
 these other things omitted by the evangelists 
 were unimportant ; St. John evidently is not 
 speaking of such things as walking, eating, or 
 drinking, but of miracles which our Saviour 
 worked, or instructions which He gave. 
 Indeed, we do not need St. John to tell us that 
 our Lord must have said much more to His 
 disciples than is recorded in these short Gospels, 
 and especially in the time between His resur- 
 rection and ascension, when he was, as St. 
 I<uke tells us (Acts i. 3), *'for forty days ap- 
 pearing to them and speaking of the kingdom 
 of God.'' 
 
 The other books of the New Testament, with 
 the exception of the Acts, which is as it were a 
 continuation of the Gospels, but in a certain 
 way still more incomplete, being principally 
 occupied with the acts and words of only one 
 of the apostles, and of the revelation of St. 
 John, which we can hardly use confidently on 
 account of its mysterious nature, are epistles 
 written from time to time, evidently principally 
 
22 
 
 Bible Protestantism. 
 
 to Christians, and therefore intended not so 
 much to teach the world Christian truth as to 
 instruct Christians more fully, or to remind 
 them of what they had already been told. 
 
 It is, then, perfectly clear that the apostles 
 did not take the New Testament as the ground 
 of their instructions. It would have been ab- 
 surd for them to use each other's epistles as the 
 basis of their preaching ; the Gospels were no 
 doubt more frequently appealed to as time went 
 on. But substantially it is plain that Christian- 
 ity went on during the first century with com- 
 paratively little appeal to the Bible, and with 
 little need to use it. And it could not have 
 been used as a whole, and therefore, according to 
 Protestant ideas, Christianity must have labored 
 under great difficulties until the end of the first 
 century ; for the Bible was not completed till 
 about that time. I trust, then, that it is clear 
 that this book, holy and precious as it undoubt- 
 edly is, was not the principal foundation of 
 Christianity in the early Christian times. 
 
 lyct us now see whether the view can be 
 held that it is the only foundation on which 
 we can safely rest our religion now. 
 
 The Protestant theory is that the pure Chris- 
 tian truth, as held in the days when the Bible 
 was written, was gradually corrupted and 
 obscured by human additions and interpreta- 
 tions ; and that the only way to get rid of these 
 
Bible Protestantism. 23 
 
 is to sweep everything else away at one stroke, 
 and depend on the Bible alone. 
 
 Now, it must be respectfully submitted that 
 this theory is unsatisfactory. For, granting 
 that the Bible as we have it is a faithful record, 
 so far as it goes, of the actions and teaching of 
 our Ivord and of His apostles, and that the pic- 
 ture which it presents of primitive Christianity 
 is, so far as that picture is clear and certain, a 
 true one; nevertheless it is plain that this 
 record and this picture are far from being as 
 complete or as clear as they should be. That 
 the text of the Bible is not clear and con- 
 clusive on many points of doctrine on which it 
 does treat, is sufl&ciently proved by the very dis- 
 cordances of those who attempt to deduce doc- 
 trine from it without any other aid*; that it is 
 not complete is equally manifest. As has been 
 said, there are great gaps in its account, notably 
 its almost entire silence on the instructions 
 given by our I^ord during the time of His 
 risen life on earth; and it- is an absolutely 
 gratuitous and unwarrantable assumption to 
 take for granted that the matters which it omits; 
 were of no importance. Nowhere is it said in 
 the Bible that such is the case. Some, it is 
 true, imagine that St. John means to say this, 
 where in the close of his revelation — ^which is 
 also, as we have it, the close of the Bible itself — 
 **if any man shall add to these things, God 
 
24 
 
 Bible Protestantism. 
 
 shall add unto him the plagues written in this 
 book.'* But it hardly needs to be remarked 
 that St. John speaks here of the prophecies 
 contained in this particular book of revelation 
 which he had written ; for the Bible itself was 
 not collected into one book at the time at which 
 he was writing. * 
 
 We have, th^n, no guarantee that there are 
 not important matters of Christian faith which 
 are not to be found in the Bible at all. We 
 may indeed say that the points accepted by the 
 Catholic Church are inconsistent with or even 
 contrary to the Bible; but that does not help 
 us. That others have added something errone« 
 ous does not show that there was nothing true 
 and important which should have been added* 
 
 It does not get us out of the difficulty that 
 our Bible record is fragmentary. If we use it 
 alone, we are in the same position as those 
 would be who should try to construct a com- 
 plete Roman history simply out of the books of 
 Livy or Tacitus, reliable as these books might 
 be. If we act honestly, we must confess that 
 we have no certainty, if we proceed on these 
 lines, that we have the whole Christian faith or 
 can ever obtain it; it is something which the 
 apostles had, but which has, perhaps, now to a 
 great extent been lost ; we have some pieces of 
 it, but not with any certainty the whole. It is, 
 as has been said, merely a wreck which has 
 
Bible Protestantism. 
 
 25 
 
 come down to us. Science, it is true, may by 
 means of analogies, and the general plan of ani- 
 mal construction, fill up a whole skeleton from a 
 few bones ; but we cannot do that with a thing 
 so unique as a Divine revelation. 
 
 But, it may be argued, half a loaf is better 
 than no bread. True; but that only half a 
 loaf in this case should be left us, that we know 
 less of the Christian faith than the first Chris- 
 tians did, would imply an imperfection, a 
 partial failure in the work of God ; it would 
 mean that He undertook to make a revelation to 
 the world, and failed to take the means neces- 
 sary to perpetuate it. 
 
 If, driven from this idea by its inconsist^ilicy 
 with the Divine Omnipotence, we say that all 
 necessary Christian truth must have come down 
 to us in the Bible, we are simply begging the 
 question whether or no anything has come 
 down to us outside the Bible. We cannot dis- 
 pose of this by objecting to some teachings of 
 the Roman^ Church ; there still remains a possi- 
 bility that somewhere or other some body of 
 believers, such as the -Greeks for example, 
 may be in possession of the entire revelation. 
 We cannot be excused from satisfying ourselves 
 by thorough investigation on this point. And 
 we should also be sure that the teachings of 
 Rome are really inconsistent with the Bible, 
 Canryou say that by your own study you are 
 
26 
 
 Bible Protestantism, 
 
 sure of this, or that you know by actual inquiry, 
 from Catholic authorities, what the teachings 
 of Rome really are ? 
 
 If Almighty God had in the Bible or else- 
 where told us that this book contained the 
 whole of Christianity, we should be on good 
 ground. If Christ Himself had written the 
 book and set it forth as a text-book, so to 
 speak, of His religion, we could rest securely in 
 it, and have no need to inquire farther? 
 
 That the Bible is not a book, like the Koran 
 for instance, set forth by the founder of the re- 
 ligion as its authoritative exposition, is in fact 
 the fundamental weakness of Bible Protestant- 
 ism. If Christ had intended His religion to be 
 propagated and preserved by means of a book, 
 can any conceivable reason be urged why He 
 should not have written one ? Of His ability to 
 do so there can, for the Christian, be no ques- 
 tion. 
 
 But the Bible, so far from being such a book, 
 is simply, as far as the New Testament, its im- 
 portant part for us, is concerned, a collection of 
 Christian writings, on its face not essentially 
 more conclusive than the works of other early 
 Christian writers would be, especially if we 
 consider the Gospel of St. Mark, and the Gospel 
 and Acts of St. Luke ; for no special reason is 
 evident why their words should be infallible. 
 They were not apostles ; and we do not read of 
 
Bible Protestantism. 
 
 27 
 
 their having any peculiar Divine commission to 
 teach Christianity to the world. 
 
 Now, this consideration opens another chasm 
 under the feet of Bible Protestants, which would 
 be of itself fatal to them. It is this : what 
 certainty have they, after all, that the books of 
 the Bible were written by inspired men, and that 
 no others were ? Why do they admit just these, 
 and reject others ? How do they know for sure 
 even that these were written by the authors to 
 whom they are commonly ascribed ? For one 
 thing, do they know for sure who wrote the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, or even the Gospels 
 themselves ? May it not have been some quite 
 irresponsible or merely private author ? What 
 critical or scholarly ability or learning can ever ^ 
 give us the certainty we need on matters like 
 these, where Divine faith is so much needed, 
 and error so dangerous? 
 
 The fact is, that this blind faith in the Bible, 
 as Protestants have the book, got together for 
 us English-speaking people under King James, 
 but trusted in as if it had been brought to earth 
 visibly and publicly by an angel from heaven, 
 is an act far more unreasonable and groundless 
 than any which they even charge us Catholics 
 with making. 
 
 If they choose to make such a blind act, 
 urging the example of so many good men 
 who have done the same, or claiming that 
 
28 Bible Protestantism. 
 
 the Spirit of God teaches them to do it, well 
 and good ; but let them not claim any special 
 superiority of intelligence, or any particular 
 reasonableness in so doing. Let them not pre- 
 tend that it is anything more than an assump- 
 tion, in itself, to say the least, no better than 
 that of one who would believe the Pope to be 
 infallible simply because so many other good 
 people believe the same, or because God seems 
 to inspire him with that conviction. 
 
 Reason is as much abandoned in one case as 
 in the other ; but the latter view is not that of a 
 Catholic, and I think we shall see that in fact 
 reason has a good deal more to say in favor 
 qf the genuine Catholic position. 
 
 And I will repeat in conclusion, lest I should 
 seem to despise this holiest of books, that 
 Catholics believe in it and revere it as much as 
 and even more than Protestants ; but we have, 
 while they have not, a rational and consistent 
 ground for §o doinjg;. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THK CATHOIvIC IDEA OP CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 THOUGH others beside Bible Protestants 
 have from time to time separated them- 
 selves, and are now separated, from the Catholic 
 Church, there seems to be no distinct theory ou 
 which they have done so which we need especi- 
 ally consider. For either they stand on ground 
 similar to that taken by Catholics, which we are 
 about to describe, or they pretend to some new 
 revelation supplementary to that of Christ, 
 which puts them outside the class to whom thi^ 
 book is specially addressed ; or they have 
 ceased to regard Christ as a Divine, or at least 
 infallible, teacher, being in fact eclectics in the 
 matter of religion, and not believing, strictly 
 speaking, in any one true religion at all, and 
 therefore equally outside of our direct scope. \ 
 We will then take up at once the Catholic 
 idea, or theory if you wish to call it so, of the 
 Christian religion, as distinguished from that 
 which we have been discussing. j 
 
 This theory simply is that the Christian faith 
 has been taught, and was intended by its 
 Divine Founder to be taught, in all ages on the 
 same plan that was adopted in the beginning ; 
 
30 The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 
 
 that IS to say, by authorized human teachers, 
 whose adherence to it has been secured by a 
 special Divine assistance, as that of the apos- 
 tles was in the beginning. 
 
 Now this is, of course, an impossible plan for 
 a merely human founder of a religion. A mere 
 man, who has arrived by meditation and the 
 practice of virtue at some great religious truths, 
 or what he considers as such, even though he 
 also believes that in this he has been assisted by 
 Almighty God in some special way, cannot feel 
 safe as to the propagation of these truths with- 
 out loss or admixture by simply committing 
 them to the charge of other men. The precise 
 «iemory of what he, the founder, said will 
 gradually be lost ; the ideas of his representa- 
 tives will after a time be confounded with his 
 own. Of course he may be content that such 
 should be the case ; he may regard the religion 
 which is taught in his name as intended by 
 God to be the work of many co-operators ; he 
 lays the foundation, others continue the build- 
 ing ; and perhaps even the foundation may be 
 somewhat altered or improved as time goes on. 
 But a religion like this is not such as those 
 whom we are addressing regard the Christian 
 religion to be. 
 
 For a human founder, then, who wishes the 
 record of his ideas to be perpetual ; who desires 
 that none of them should be lost, and that noth* 
 
The Catholic Idea of Christianity', 31 
 
 ing s'lould be admitted outside of them in the 
 leli^ioii which he establishes, except indeed 
 what the light of nature teaches all men, no 
 course seems to be open except to commit his 
 ideas or his religion to writing. In this way 
 there can remain little doubt, except what may- 
 arise from the errors of copyists or printers, as 
 to what he actually said ; and generally these 
 errors will be slight and easily detected. 
 
 But after all, though it is the best course he 
 can adopt, it is open to serious difficulties. For 
 no language can be made so plain that there 
 will not be an opening for discussions as to its 
 meaning. To take an example from another 
 matter, the Constitution of the United States 
 was drawn up with the utmost care ; but for all 
 that it is not possible, and never was expected 
 by its authors to be possible, for every one to 
 agree on its meaning without a court to inter- 
 pret it. 
 
 Now, it is true that a human founder of reli- 
 gion can provide for such a court of interpreta- 
 tion for his ideas, and his provisions will proba- 
 J)ly be carried out; but he cannot possibly 
 insure that the ideas of this court will always 
 agree with his own. His own thoughts will 
 then, in spite of all he can do, be gradually 
 changed somewhat by the gloss put upon them 
 by his interpreters. c r C 
 
 But for a Divine founder these objections can- 
 
32 
 
 The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 
 
 not, of course^ exist. God is able to keep His 
 truth in the world in many ways. He can, for 
 instance, reveal it to each man individually ; or 
 He can by repeated public manifestations of it, 
 accompanied by miraculous proofs such as those 
 furnished by Christ and His apostles, prevent 
 the world from forgetting it ; or He can commit 
 it to a book, as a human founder would, pre- 
 venting false interpretations of that book by 
 making it so clear that it could not be misun- 
 derstood, or by establishing a court of interpre- 
 tation for it, the decisions of which He would 
 Himself secure from error. 
 
 But on the Protestant theory, He has adopted 
 neither of these plans. The only book which 
 they admit as coming from Him is not so clear 
 that it cannot be misunderstood, nor, according 
 to them, has any court been established by Him 
 for its correct interpretation. Some of them, 
 indeed, claim that He does reveal it to every 
 earnest inquirer without the aid of any visible 
 teacher, but the actual discordance of those who 
 claim to arrive at it in that way, or even with 
 the help of the Bible, is enough to confute that 
 claim. As for repeated miraculous manifesta- 
 tions of it, such are not recorded in history. 
 
 Other methods could no doubt be followed by 
 the Divine Wisdom, beside these which I have 
 mentioned ; but we cannot, perhaps, see them 
 very clearly, with the exception of one, the 
 
The Catholic Idea of Christianity, 33 
 
 simplest of all that we know of, and requiring 
 the least special intervention on God's part. 
 And that is the one which I have mentioned 
 as that which Catholics believe He has adopted 
 through the whole course of Christianity, and 
 which Protestants themselves must admit He 
 did at its beginning. 
 
 It is that of having for a fundamental author- 
 ity in all ages, for a means of deciding all 
 doubtful points, not a book alone, or a book 
 with authorized interpreters, but simply the aU" 
 thorized interpreters of the faith such as the 
 apostles were, with a book perhaps to help 
 them, but still not absolutely needing that book 
 for the discharge of their ofl&ce any more than 
 the apostles themselves did for theirs. 
 
 This simple plan it is the essential point of 
 Protestantism to ignore or combat. As has 
 been seen, they have nothing satisfactory or 
 historically successful to offer in place of it, but 
 it they will not admit. 
 
 Some Protestants, like those of the Church of 
 England, go so far as to believe in an organized 
 and Divinely constituted body of men, estab- 
 lished to teach and preserve the faith of Christ ; 
 but they refuse to admit a Divine supervision of 
 this teaching, at least of such a kind as will 
 enable any one without hesitation to know just 
 where to look for the truth. Their ground^ as 
 has been said, is similar to ours, but lacking in 
 
34 The Catholic Idea of Christianity, 
 
 this important respect. And history shows only 
 too plainly that the Church, in their sense of 
 the term, has varied in its doctrine, taught dog- ' 
 mas at various times, and in various places at 
 the same time, inconsistent with each other, and 
 therefore to a considerable extent erroneous. 
 
 Protestants, then, and indeed all Christians 
 separated from the Catholic Church, do not 
 1^ acknowledge the existence of this actual living 
 and precisely determinable authorit}' in the 
 world, to which the preservation of the faith has 
 been entrusted. It is, indeed, possible to with- 
 draw from the government and discipline which 
 Catholics believe to be also entrusted to this 
 authority, without doubting its claim to be the 
 Divinely constituted teacher of the faith; but 
 this sort of rebellion against it, which we call 
 schism y hardly exists pure and simple at 
 present ; the Greek Church furnishing, how- 
 ever, a near approximation to it. 
 
 The question now naturally arising, as we 
 examine the Catholic theory, is where precisely 
 this authority is located; who are the succes- 
 sors of the apostles, not, be it observed, in their 
 inspiration, or in their power ■ of working mira- 
 cles, but in this office so needed for the stability 
 of religion, that of interpreting the true meaning 
 of the Christian revelation, and of deciding 
 doubts which might arise about it. 
 
 Whoever they are, they must be men dis- 
 
The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 35 
 
 tinctly recognizable ; not merely men noted for 
 talent or learning, or even for virtue, since these 
 tests are too vague and doubtful. They must, 
 therefore, be men occupying some definite posi- 
 tion in the Church ; tliey must naturally belong 
 to the clergy, since teaching the faith belongs 
 to them, if anything does ; and to the highest 
 and most distinguished rank of the clergy, if 
 such ranks exist in it. 
 
 ^ As it is, then, only among those Christians 
 who recognize such ranks or grades in the 
 clergy that this belief in a certain living author- 
 ity in matters exists, only two opinions can well 
 exist upon this point. One is, that the whole 
 body of bishops must be called to a coungil, and 
 that this council, with the assistance of the 
 Holy Spirit, determines the faith ; or that one 
 or more of them have been, by a special Divine 
 prerogative, appointed to this office. 
 
 The latter is the teaching of the Catholic 
 Church, as formulated in the Vatican Council. 
 Its decision necessarily removes the doubts of 
 such as might otherwise have held that the 
 meeting of the bishops generally was necessary 
 for authoritative judgments on points of faith ; 
 for here they have their own authority speak- 
 ing. ^ 
 
 The Vatican Council, then, teaches unequivo- 
 cally that the supreme power in determining 
 matters of faith rests in the person of the Pope, 
 
$6 The Infallibility of the Pope. 
 
 whom Catholics regard as the successor of St. 
 Peter in the Apostolic See of Rome. 
 
 We will proceed, then, in the next chapter to 
 discuss this matter of the infallibility, as it is 
 called, of the Pope; to explain just what is 
 meant by it, and to remove misapprehensions 
 which may exist. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THK INFAI.I.IBII,ITY OF THK POPK. 
 
 IT ought to be clear from what has been said 
 that the special prerogative which Catholics 
 now unhesitatingly and universally believe to 
 have been conferred on the Pope by the Divine 
 Founder of Christianity has a very special and 
 limited range, though certainly very complete in 
 its proper domain. It consists in his ability to 
 decide questions concerning religion about 
 which there might be room for doubt in the 
 minds of Christians, either on account of there 
 being a large number of adherents, or apparently 
 strong arguments, on both sides of the ques- 
 tions. Of course if an opinion is clearly sup- 
 ported by the plain text of Scripture, or if it has 
 been held by general consent in the Church as 
 being of faith, or if it has been settled by a 
 previous decision, there is no need for the Pope 
 to interfere ; and in point of fact he seldom does 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 37 
 
 so. But still a good many cases have occurred, 
 and probably will occur, in which such an adju- 
 dication becomes necessary. It is not required 
 that an appeal should be made to him ; he acts 
 as it seems expedient to himself, not neglecting, 
 however, in matters of considerable doubt to 
 take advice from learned men. 
 
 In the more important questions which occa- 
 sionally arise, it has always been deemed more 
 prudent to formally convoke the whole episco- 
 pate in a general or oecumenical council, and not 
 only to hear their opinions, but to take their 
 vote on the matter; for the bishops are not 
 merely advisers, but really judges of the faith 
 with the Pope. But the decision of their major- 
 ity would not be accepted unless confirmed by 
 him. 
 
 Now, let it be clearly understood that it is not 
 the office of the Pope to act as one inspired, to 
 receive or to give to the world any new revela- 
 tion. It is merely to decide what the original 
 deposit, as we call it, of faith was, as committed 
 by Christ to His apostles ; or, in other words, to 
 repeat the decisions which the apostles them- 
 selves would have made with regard to the doc- 
 trines of Christianity. 
 
 Still less is it his ofiice to settle matters of 
 science, or ordinary questions of fact of any 
 kind. Not but what the domains claimed at 
 least by science, and those of faith, may some- 
 
38 
 
 The Infallibility of the Pope, 
 
 times overlap ; as, for instance, they may to some 
 extent in the matter of evolution, especially if 
 that is supposed to apply to the human soul ; or 
 as they certainly do when so-called science 
 asserts that matter existed from all eternity. I 
 say so-called * ' science, for it is plain that we 
 can never by scientific investigation arrive at 
 any proof of a hypothesis of this nature. And 
 even questions of historical fact may belong to 
 faith, by being necessarily connected with some 
 of its dogmas, or by forming part of the inspired 
 record of Holy Scripture; there would, for 
 instance, be a conflict of history or geology with 
 the Church if it should be asserted, in the name 
 of either of these branches of learning, that the 
 account of the deluge was simply a myth. 
 
 But conflicts of this sort are very rare. Prac- 
 tically a Catholic is not impeded in any kind of 
 study or investigation by any fear of Papal con- 
 demnation. 
 
 Further — and this is an important and much 
 misapprehended point — it would be an enor- 
 mous mistake to suppose that the Pope is con- 
 sidered infallible, even on matters of faith, in 
 his ordinary conversation ; nor is he believed 
 to be so in preaching ; nor necessarily in his 
 v^ritings concerning matters of religion. In or- 
 der that he should be infallible, it is necessary 
 that he should act formally as the teacher of the 
 whole Church, as the successor of the apostles ; 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 39 
 
 End practically we may say it is necessary that 
 his teaching should not be given by word of 
 mouth, but in writing, in a regular document ; 
 for if he merely spoke, some uncertainty would 
 exist as to what he actually said, whatever 
 means might be taken to report it. 
 
 And yet, though all this is well known and 
 understood among Catholics, how many Pro- . 
 testants there are who imagine that we believe 
 the Pope to be incapable of error, no matter 
 what he i^ speaking about, or in what way or 
 under what circumstances he expresses his 
 thoughts ; or perhaps that we even regard him 
 as infallible in the very thoughts themselves ! 
 
 Great as this error is, many fall into an error 
 much greater. It is often supposed, indeed we 
 sometimes see it stated, or what is even worse,1 
 calmly assumed, in the literature of the day, 
 that ^Catholics believe the Pope to be incapable 
 of doi7ig anything morally wrong. Infallibility 
 is confounded with impeccability. One would 
 suppose that the English language would be 
 better understood ; indeed, on other subjects the 
 writers of this nonsense seem to be men of fair 
 accuracy. It is only in speaking of us that 
 they make these absurd blunders. 
 
 This whole notion is simply ridiculous. 
 Good Catholics have, indeed, generally a re- 
 spect for the clergy ; at least they have a high 
 idea of what their character should be*, and when 
 
40 The Infallibility of the Pope. 
 
 the clergy live fairly good lives, are disposed to 
 rate their virtue as greater than it actually is ; 
 and especially, they believe the Pope, unless the 
 contrary should be plainly evident, to be a man 
 of more than the usual moral excellence which 
 they ascribe to the clergy in general. And they 
 have reason for doing so ; for it is clear before- 
 hand that the Church would, if we may say so, 
 be naturally inclined to put its best foot fore- 
 most ; and also the actual lives of the Popes, as 
 recorded in history, show plainly that they were 
 as a rule most estimable, perhaps even »aiutly, 
 men. 
 
 But they are very far from thinking that this 
 is necessarily the case. So far from thinking 
 that an action is right simply because the Pope 
 does it, they would be more scandalized at a 
 departure from the moral law in his case than 
 they would in that of any one else ; just as it is 
 perfectly obvious that they are more disedified 
 by a sin in any clergyman than by the same one 
 in a layman. 
 
 I It is of course true, however, that in points 
 about which the conscience of men is more or 
 less uncertain. Catholics, and Protestants as 
 well, are inclined to think it probable that an 
 action is right if they see a clergyman do it; 
 for they know that the clergy give more study 
 to these matters, and believe that they would as 
 a rule act according to thei'r conscience, which 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 41 
 
 would naturally be better instructed than that 
 of the laity in general. But Catholics do not, 
 any more than Protestants, hold it as certain 
 that any clergyman, or that the Pope any more 
 necessarily than^ any other clergyman, does 
 uniformly act according to his conscience. 
 
 And let me mention here, though it is a 
 little out of our direct line, another foolish 
 error entertained largely about the Pope, which 
 seems to be a sort of corollary, as a geometer 
 would say, or, in other words, an easy conclu- 
 sion from his supposed impeccability. That is 
 the notion often entertained by those outside 
 the Catholic Church, that the Pope never goes 
 to confession. Some even think that the clergy 
 do not ; but more are quite sure that the Pope 
 is exempt. 
 
 But so far is this from being the case that 
 the clergy confess much more frequently than 
 the laity in general ; and the Pope himself fully 
 as often as, if not oftener than the average of 
 the clergy. And to whom does the Pope 
 confess? Why, he chooses his confessor, 
 as any one else would do; usually he would 
 select some priest of well-known virtue and 
 learning ; probably he would choose a member 
 of some religious order — for example, a Fran- 
 ciscan, a Dominican, or a Jesuit. . You see then 
 clearly that the Pope himself does not believe 
 that he is sinless. 
 
42 The Infallibility of the Pope, 
 
 This matter of morality of which I have been 
 speaking has, however, a connection with the 
 infallibility which we are discussing, though 
 not the one which is erroneously supposed. 
 
 It is this : Catholics do believe the Pope to 
 be able to make infallible decisions with regard 
 to morals as well as faith. That is to say, that 
 he can, when occasion arises, solemnly instruct 
 the faithful with regard to principles of morality, 
 and decide points with regard to it on which 
 good and learned men have differed ; and there 
 are plenty of such points, as any one will see 
 who will take the trouble to consult treatises on 
 morals. One will find even more of them in 
 Catholic works than in Protestant ones ; not, 
 however, for the reason that Catholic morality 
 is less precise than Protestant, but because 
 Catholic writers have discussed these matters 
 much more thoroughly and with much more 
 detail, and hence come upon more of these 
 questions ; and that the Popes have still left 
 many of them open. 
 
 . But mind, it by no means follows, any more 
 in moral > than in faith, that because the Pope 
 can solemnly instruct the faithful infallibly, he 
 always or on all occasions holds or gives utter- 
 ance to correct views with regard to right or 
 wrong, unless the matter is one clear to all rea- 
 sonable men, or that som^ decision has actually 
 J)e€n made in due form with regard to it. 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 
 
 Still less does it follow that he necessarily 
 lives up to the principles which he himself 
 acknowledges as true. There is no essential 
 reason why he should do so, any more than any 
 one else. 
 
 Now a few remarks, more explicit than those 
 previously made, with regard to the way in 
 which we suppose the infallibility to attach to 
 the Pope's solemn teaching of the Church with 
 regard to faith and morals. In the first place, 
 it is clear, from what has been said, that he is 
 not habitually raised to any higher plane in 
 these matters than other Christians; for it is 
 only at the time of his formal decisions that he 
 needs to be, and we do not suppose his preroga- 
 tive to extend any farther than is needed for the 
 good of the Church. Secondly, we do not hold 
 that even at these times he is, properly speak- 
 ing, inspired ; it is simply that God assists him 
 in a special way, preventing him from making 
 any decisipn at all if the way is not reasonably 
 clear to it ; or 4f He allows him to make the 
 decision, insuring that this decision shall con- 
 tain nothing contrary to the truth. O 
 
 As a matter of fact, these formal decisions, or 
 definitions as we call them, are not made care- 
 lessly or on the spur of the moment, but after 
 much consideration and prayer, especially in 
 the more important matters, and even in lesser 
 ones where reasonable doubt seems to exist. 
 
44 The In fallibility of the Pope. 
 
 And in the greater matters, much advice ivS also 
 taken, especially of the bishops, who, as has 
 been said, are regarded as judges on these 
 questions together with the Pope; and often 
 this precaution has gone so far as the assem- 
 bling of a general council, where the subject 
 could be fully discussed. 
 
 I trust, then, that this much misunderstood 
 subject ought to be somewhat clearer to those 
 who may read what has been just Said than it 
 was before. And let me add now, as a little 
 argument hi support of the belief that Almighty 
 ^od does actually preserve these Papal defini- 
 tions from error, the historical fact that no two 
 of them have ever been contradictory, and they 
 have all formed with each other, and with the 
 faith as determined and agreed on without re- 
 course to them, a logical and consistent whole. 
 Human reason, memory, research, and learn- 
 ing are no doubt factors which would go far to 
 produce such a result ; but human passions are 
 also potent ; and it seems very unlikely that 
 such a success would be obtained, covering a 
 period of eighteen hundred years, by human 
 resources alone. 
 
 But still it may be said that this Divine inter- 
 position is a miracle which we have no right to 
 expect. IvCt us look into this. It is true that 
 the whole Christian revelation is a blessing to 
 which we have no right ; but if God wills to 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 45 
 
 give something to mankind in permanence, it is 
 reasonable to sup230se that He will take mea- 
 sures to secure that permanence. And could 
 any simpler measures, any requiring less inter- 
 position on His part, be adopted, so far as we 
 can see ? Protestants give us a book ; they 
 acknowledge that it is naturally obscure in 
 some parts, but say that God will enlighten the 
 reader as to its meaning. I say nothing about 
 the confutation of this theory by actual experi- 
 ence ; but in itself it. is plain that it requires 
 even more interposition on God's part for each 
 individual Christian than the Catholic one does 
 for the Pope alone. 
 
 Catholics claim that the Pope is infallible on 
 certain occasions ; Protestants that each and 
 every one of them is infallible all the time. 
 Which claim is the greater or the more un- 
 reasonable ? 
 
 Some one must be infallible, now and then at 
 least, or certainty with regard to the Christian 
 faith becomes impossible. Why should it not 
 be the Pope, who occupies, as is admitted even 
 by Protestants themselves, the most prominent 
 position in Christendom ? 
 
 But let us see briefly whether there are not 
 arguments, drawn from the Holy Scripture 
 itself, to show that the Pope must be the one to 
 whom this special prerogative has been given, 
 if given to any. 
 
46 The Infallibility of the Pope, % 
 
 We find, if we read the Gospels attentively, 
 that our I^ord, though giving to each of the 
 apostles the same general commission to teach 
 all nations (Matt, xxviii. 19), did not treat them 
 on terms of absolute equality. Peter, James, 
 and John were, in the first place, specially se- 
 lected by Him as witnesses of His transfigura- 
 tion, and His agony in the garden of Gethse- 
 mane. Of these James had the privilege of 
 being first called to join His Master in heaven ; 
 John of being His specially beloved disciple, 
 and the one to whom Jesus on the cross en- 
 trusted the care of His mother, the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary. L 
 
 But it was to Peter that He gave the most 
 marked signs of a special pre-eminence over the 
 rest. Especially do we see this in the cele- 
 brated passage (Matt. xvi. 18) where Christ 
 says to him, ' ' Thou art Peter, and upon this 
 rock I will build my church ' ' ; the word 
 Peter meaning a rock. And in St. Luke's 
 Gospel we read (Luke xxii. 31): **The Lord 
 said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired 
 to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. 
 But I have prayed for thee^ that thy faith fail 
 not ; and thou being once converted, confirm 
 thy brethren." (The italics are, of course, our 
 own.) And St. John tells us (John xxi. 15-17) 
 that our Lord thrice committed in a special way 
 the charge of His lambs and sheep to Peter, in 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 47 
 
 response to his protestation of love for his 
 Master : **Feed my Iambs, feed my lambs, feed 
 my sheep/* 
 
 Protestants try, of course, to explain away 
 these passages ; but it is hard to imagine that 
 they do not place St. Peter in some way at the 
 head of the apostolic college, and as having in a 
 special way the right of governing and teach- 
 ing the faithful which all the apostles enjoyed. 
 The real question is rather whether or no this 
 pre-eminence of Peter passed to any one at his 
 death ; whether he *had any succe~^or in his 
 special privileges. 
 
 But one thing seems quite clear: that there 
 could be no one to whom any special pre- 
 eminence could be assigned as a permanent ;ri- 
 stitution in the Church, except some one who 
 was in some special sense the successor of St. 
 Peter. 
 
 Now, no one has even claimed to be the ouc- 
 cessor of St. Peter in any special way whatever 
 except the Bishop of Rome, in which city, by 
 the common consent of Christians, it has been 
 generally agreed St. Peter fixed his ultimate 
 residence, and in which he suffered martyrdom. 
 No one else except the Bishop of Antioch, 
 which city St. Peter first chose for his see, could 
 reasonably make such a claim ; and on his part 
 no such claim has been urged. 
 
 If, then, there is any one who has a claim 
 
48 The Infallibility of the Pope. 
 
 founded in Scripture to any pre-eminence over 
 the bishops of the Church in general, that one 
 must be the bishop of St. Peter's see of Rome ; 
 and indeed this distinction haS been generally 
 accorded in some way or shape to this bishop, 
 or^ in other words, to the Pope, even by those 
 who have separated themselves from his con- 
 trol. 
 
 There is, in short, no plausible candidate 
 for the leadership of the Church except the 
 Pope; and there never has been one except 
 him, who could rest his* claim on Scriptural 
 grounds. 
 
 If, then, this ofl&ce of infallible teacher of the 
 faith, or restorer of it when it may in the lapse 
 of time become doubtful, this office which has 
 been shown to be the means by which the faith 
 could be preserved with the minimum of Diviqe 
 interposition, belongs to any one, it is to the 
 Pope that it would naturally belong ; and he is 
 the only one who has permanently claimed or 
 exercised it, no pretensions on the part of 
 others having, we may say, been seriously 
 made or entertained. 
 
 It would seem, then, that the Catholic claim 
 of the Pope's infallibility, after the manner 
 which has been described, is both reasonable 
 and Scriptural. I do not propose here to go 
 into a further proof of it, or a defence of it 
 against objections which might be made ; to do 
 
The Infallibility of the Pope. 49 
 
 so properly would require a volume ; and such 
 volumes have been written, and can be con- 
 sulted by all. But I do submit that this Catho- 
 lic claim or theory, so far from being supersti- 
 tious or unreasonable, is prima facie the most 
 reasonable one that can be urged (especially 
 when we consider actual historical facts) , if we 
 assume that the Christian religion was a de- 
 finite leaching of supernatural truths to be per- 
 petuated to the end of time ; and that its superi- 
 ority in reasonableness to the theory either that 
 the Bible was originally intended to be, or that 
 it now has become in the providence of God, the 
 only means available for this end, is obvious on 
 the very surface to any one who will give th^ 
 matter any serious consideration. 
 
 In the next chapter I will proceed to explain 
 the exalted opinion which Catholics have, and 
 the use which we make, of that most holy and 
 venerable book, the Bible; to show that we 
 regard it as truly the Word of God, and to state 
 the reasons which we have for doing so. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 The; CATHOI.IC IDKA OF I^H^ BIBI,K. 
 
 IT has been stated that Catholics regard the 
 Bible as the Word of God, and revere it as 
 such, no less than Protestants; and indeed 
 even more. We look on it, then, as a most 
 certain testimony to the Christian religion, and 
 a most pure source from which to obtain the 
 true faith. We reject nothing which it con- 
 tains, we accept it as a ^niost precious gift of 
 God, from beginning to end. 
 
 We accept, indeed, more of it than Protestams 
 do. For, as has been said, the^^ are some 
 books, which all belong, by the way, to the Old 
 Testament, which we have in our Bibles, but 
 which are omitted from most Protestant ones. 
 In other words, Protestants, at the time of the 
 Reformation, reformed the Bible as well as a 
 good many other things ; they dropped from it 
 a number of books which their forefathers for 
 centuries had considered as forming a part of it. 
 
 And now let us see wliat reason we have for 
 accepting the Bible as we have it. It is hard to 
 see how a Protestant can have absolute cer- 
 tainty that all the books of his Bible are in- 
 spired. If he makes a study of the matter, he 
 50 
 
The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 
 
 5t 
 
 will find that many learned men doubt even the 
 authenticity of great portions of it ; so he can- 
 not rest his faith in it on general agreement 
 among wise men that it was really written by 
 the authors to whom it is commonly assigned. 
 Nor can he defend it on the ground that all 
 pious and faithful Christians have always 
 believed its various books to have come from 
 the writers to which they are usually ascribed, 
 or that they have always considered them as 
 inspired by the Spirit of God. Of course there 
 is a difference between these two beliefs ; there 
 seems, for instance, to be no obvious reason, as 
 has been remarked, why the writings of Mark 
 or lyuke, even if we are sure we have them, 
 should be inspired any more than those of any 
 other of the early Christians. 
 
 The fact is, that during all the ages of perse* 
 cution — that is, during the first three centuries 
 of Christianity, and for a considerable time 
 after — though the books of the Old Testament 
 had been accepted from the Jews, those of the 
 New were still by no means put in a definite 
 shape. Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, the cele- 
 brated ecclesiastical historian, writing in the 
 early part of the fourth century, tells us that 
 several of the books we now accept were thenja 
 doubt. 
 
 He says, for instance, in the first book of his 
 history, with regard to the second Epistle of 
 
§2 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 
 
 St. Peter: We have not, indeed, understood it 
 to be embodied with the sacred books, yet as it 
 appeared useful to many, it was studiously read 
 with the pther Scriptures'' (chap, iii.) And 
 in another place (chap, xxiv.) he remarks, 
 Besides the Gospel of John, his first Epistle is 
 acknowledged withoilt dispute, both by those 
 of the present day, and also by the ancients. 
 The other two Epistles, however, are disputed. 
 The opinions respecting the Revelation are still 
 greatly divided.'' A little later on (chap, xxv.) 
 he gives the following canon of the New 
 Testament, quite in full: **Here, among the 
 first, must be placed the holy quaternion of the 
 Gospels ; these are followed by * The Book of 
 the Acts of the Apostles ' ; after this must be 
 mentioned the Epistles of Paul, which are 
 followed by the acknowledged first Epistle of 
 John, as also the first of Peter, to be admitted 
 In like manner. After these are to be placed, 
 If proper, the Revelation of John, concerning 
 which we shall ofier the different opinions in 
 due time. These, then, are acknowledged as 
 genuine. Among the disputed books, although 
 they are well known and approved by many, is 
 reputed that called the Epistle of James and 
 Jude. Also the 'second Epistle of Peter,' and 
 those called the 'second and third of John,* 
 whether they are of the evangelist or some 
 other of the same name." He also_ states 
 
The Catholic Idea of the Bible, 
 
 53 
 
 further on that a good deal of doubt existed as 
 to the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews ; 
 this point is, indeed, at the present time a good 
 deal discussed by critics. 
 
 It is evident, then, that in the time of 
 Eusebius no certainty was felt as to precisely 
 what books of the New Testament should be 
 admitted as being of authority. Various other 
 authors, previous and subsequent to Eusebius, 
 give somewhat different catalogues of the 
 sacred books. 
 
 Now, the point is when and in what way the 
 canon of the New Testament was first definitely 
 settled on; that is, settled by an authority 
 which might seem at least to speak in the name 
 of the Church, and not merely in that of private 
 criticism or learning. 
 
 The first Christian synod which we find as 
 sanctioning a special canon, or collection of 
 books as properly belonging to the Bible, was 
 that of Hippo, in Africa, in the year 393. This 
 canon of Hippo was confirmed by councils held 
 at Carthage in 397 and 419, and in 474, as 
 nearly as can be ascertained, by Pope Gelasius. 
 This canon is identical with that now held as 
 the correct one, by Catholics, and solemnly 
 repeated in the Council of Trent, at the time of 
 the Reformation. It contains, therefore, what 
 Protestants call the apocryphal books of the Old 
 Testament, but it rejects none of those which 
 
54 
 
 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 
 
 Protestants receive ; in the new Testament 
 there is no diflFerence between the two, the 
 Protestants having taken the same books 
 genuine and inspired which the Catholic 
 Church had so regarded, and no others. 
 
 Now, it is quite manifest why Catholics re- 
 gard just such books as belonging to the Bible, 
 and such others as not so belonging. It is 
 because such is the decision of the Church 
 assembled in council, and of the Popes acting 
 in their official capacity. Whatever one may 
 think of it, it is evidently a clear and intelli- 
 gible reason ; for we regard the Church and the 
 Popes as infallible in such matters. 
 
 But what solid reason have Protestants to 
 induce them to accept any definite canon of 
 Scripture ? Not the decrees cf the Popes or the 
 councils of the Church of course, for these they 
 do not accept in other matters. And if not 
 these, what else ? Why is the canon of Pope 
 Gelasius any better for them than the one we 
 have given, from Eusebius, the historiau? It 
 becomes for them simply a matter of private 
 judgment whether a certain book of the Bible 
 is inspired or not ; and therefore since the Bible 
 is all they have as an authoritative basis for 
 Christianity, the strength of this vSole authority 
 becomes thus a matter of private judgment; 
 many, if not most of its books become not sub- 
 stantially better than others written in early 
 
The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 5 5 
 
 Christian times which might be used instead of 
 them ; and indeed the whole matter of faith 
 reduces to private judgment. The Protestant 
 has no sure ground to rest on ; he can only 
 construct his religion by selecting what it seems 
 probable to him was the teaching of Christ. 
 He can, of course, adopt other people's opin- 
 ions ; but they also can have for him no more 
 than a human value. 
 
 But after all, it may be urged, how is your 
 own basis a sure one ? You have been proving 
 the Church, the infallibility of the Pope, etc., 
 by means of the Bible, and now 3^ou turn round 
 and prove the Bible by the Church. 
 
 This criticism seems at first to be a very 
 sound one, but it is not so sound as it appears. 
 For we all have to start with some recorded 
 facts, some testimony of others, in convincing 
 ourselves about any matter of fact which has 
 not come under pur own personal observation. 
 And it is absurd, and contrary to common 
 Bense, to say that we can never arrive at cer- 
 tainty in this way. If we cannot, then we 
 are not certain about any point of history ; we 
 do not know for sure that there was ever such a 
 person as George Washington or Christopher 
 Columbus. Nay more, without depending on 
 testimony we cannot be confident that there is 
 now any such country as England or France, 
 unless we have been there ourselves ; even the 
 
$6 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 
 
 
 
 answers we receive to letters which we under- 
 take to send there may be part of a gigantic 
 conspiracy set up against us by the Post-office. 
 
 Very well then ; to prove that there was such 
 a person as Christ, and to arrive at some 
 knowledge of what He said and did, we take 
 the accounts which have come down to us, 
 either committed to writing, or handed down by 
 word of mouth from one generation to another. 
 We find them concurrent to a considerable ex- 
 tent, and we find especially those accounts so 
 concurrent which are written in what we call 
 the Bible ; and -the very fact that these latter 
 agree well with each other, that they have been 
 considered in all ages as substantially correct, 
 and that we find in history no serious protest 
 against them, and a general agreement as to 
 their authorship, gives us more certainty as to 
 what they contain than we have with regard to 
 almost any facts which occurred at the time 
 they appeared. We have, then, a more reason- 
 able certainty about Christ, and what He did 
 and said, than we have about past events not 
 coming under our own observation. 
 
 We find, then, with this reasonable certainty, 
 from the Bible record, that He established a 
 Church, and constituted an infallible authority 
 in it, to last to the end of time ; so far, that is, 
 as it is admitted that this really is the testimony 
 of the Bible. 
 
The Catholic Idea of the Bible, 
 
 57 
 
 Then, being convinced of the existence of 
 this authority, by means of it we establish, not 
 what we started with, but something different. 
 We are not convinced by the Church that there 
 is a Bible record, and that in its main points it 
 can be relied on with certainty ; for this we 
 knew before. But the Church tells us that this 
 book has more than a merely human au- 
 thority, that it is the Word of God, inspired by 
 Him; and that just such writings and such 
 alone can be considered as belonging to it. 
 This last is something we did not know before ; 
 but our conviction of it rests on the same 
 national grounds as our first conviction did that 
 it was a trustworthy book, humanly speaking. 
 One comes from the other. ' 
 
 The argument may be put, in brief, as 
 follows: If the Bible is a trustworthy book, it 
 is more than that ; it is inspired. For the 
 Church is infallible, if the Bible is trustworthy • 
 and the Church tells us that the Bible is in- 
 spired. The reasoning is very similar to that 
 by which we very properly prove Christ's 
 Divinity. Christ, we say, was a wise and good 
 man, and therefore would not claim to be God 
 if He were not ; but he did claim to be God ; 
 therefore He really is so. This must be 
 admitted by every one who believes He did say 
 various things which the Gospels recorded of 
 Him. If He said them, He either was God, or 
 
58 
 
 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 
 
 He was, as the Jews maintained, a blasphemer, 
 either wicked or insane. 
 
 But after all, it may be urged that our con- 
 viction of the Divine authority of the Bible will 
 never at best rise to a higher certainty than the 
 merely human one with which it began. 
 
 In answer to this, it may be said, in the first 
 place, that we do not depend on the Bible alone 
 to prove the infallibility of the Church ; nu- 
 merous other arguments can be given ; as, for 
 example, that already spoken of, the actual 
 accordance in its decisions through all these 
 centuries, which could hardly have been se- 
 cured without Divine interposition. 
 
 But the true answer is, that God, by a direct 
 action of grace in our hearts, builds on a merely 
 rational foundation a secure edifice of Divine 
 faith. We believe by faith, not by reason ; but 
 our faith is rational, as reason has led us to it. 
 
 Faith once implanted by God in our hearts, 
 it will stand secure of its own strength, even if 
 the rational foundation passes from our minds ; 
 as a solid stone arch stands after the wooden 
 frame is removed round which it was built. 
 
 But though faith itself is thus vSecure in its 
 own strength, and may even be immediately im- 
 planted by God in an individual soul without 
 argument, it is not reasonable to suppose that a 
 faith independent of reason and argument can 
 be intended by Him for adoption by the world. 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 59 
 
 This is just the point where the Catholic 
 belief in the Bible has the advantage of the 
 Protestant one. The one is rational and log- 
 ical ; the other irrational and blind. Tht 
 former is founded on good reasons ; the latter 
 on what is, comparatively, guesswork. 
 
 However, it is not so much the object of this 
 chapter, or of this work in general, to defend 
 the faith of Catholics, as to show just what that 
 faith is. 
 
 CHAPTER VI, 
 
 TH^ PRINCIPAI. POINTS OF CATHOLIC FAITH. 
 
 O far my chief endeavor has been to show 
 what the basis of the Catholic faith is, or 
 what are the sources from which we derive it. 
 I trust that it is perfectly clear to all that we do 
 not believe that new additions are being made 
 to it as time goes on ; that we do not hold that 
 the Pope or any other authority in the Church 
 receives from time to time new revelations, and 
 proposes them to the faithful to be received 
 implicitly by them ; but that we believe the 
 faith or doctrine of the Church to have been 
 fully in the possession of the Apostles, and that 
 if anything is promulgated or definitely decreed 
 by the Church as being part Of the faith, the 
 
6o The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 meaning is that this was a thing which the 
 Apostles themselves believed and preached. 
 
 The Church, then, and the Holy Scripture 
 are simply our means for finding out what the 
 doctrine of the Apostles was. And it must not 
 be imagined that we trust more to the Church 
 than to the Bible. In point of fact the Bible is 
 for us, as well as for Protestants, the higher 
 authority of the two ; for its teaching is in- 
 spired by the Holy Ghost, whereas that of the 
 Pope or of the Church is merely preserved from 
 error by Him. But in order to reverence the 
 Holy Scripture and to learn our faith from it, it 
 is necessary in the first place to know what is 
 Holy Scripture for certain, and what cannot be 
 depended on as such ; and it is also necessary 
 to have a guide to help us to understand its 
 sense, which is obscure in many places, as is 
 evident by the different interpretations which 
 good and learned men have put on it. But 
 where its sense is plain, the Church does not 
 presume to overrule or ignore it ; and the 
 Church is not afraid of any part of the Bible as 
 being irreconcilable with her doctrine. 
 ^ To these two great sources of Christian truth 
 another may be added with evident propriety. 
 This is what we call tradition. By this we 
 mean the account of the faith which is handed 
 down by word of mouth, or by writing, from 
 one generation to another. Any ordinarily 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 6i 
 
 well-instructed Catholic can, for example, give 
 an account of his faith in its principal points ; 
 he can teach it orally to his children, or write it 
 down for those generally who are to come after 
 him. Still better can this be done by the 
 learned who have made the faith their special 
 study. 
 
 Now, one such statement of the doctrine of 
 the Church in general, or of any special point 
 or points of it, does not of itself amount to so 
 very much, as the source from which it pro- 
 ceeds is not infallible ) but if any point is found 
 on which the great majority of these statements 
 agree, the evidence in favor of this point be- 
 comes very strong. It does not give the same 
 certainty which comes from the plain words of 
 Scripture, or from a definite decree of the 
 Church itself ; but it gives something very near 
 it. And the Bible itself gives testimony to the 
 utility of this means in preserving the faith 
 entire and unchanged. ** Brethren," says St. 
 Paul, writing to the Thessalonians (II. Thess. 
 ii. 14), **hold the traditions which you have 
 learned, whether by word, or our epistle.'* 
 And to Timothy he writes (II. Tim. ii. 2), the 
 things which thou hast heard of me by many 
 witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, 
 who shall be fit to teach others also.'* 
 
 But really we hardly need this guarantee of 
 the usefulness of this method of preserving any 
 
62 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 kind of valuable information. It is practised 
 constantly in all the arts and trades of men, and 
 even in the sciences; and in religion it is, 
 indeed, used by Protestants themselves. 
 
 I^et us now come to the consideration of the 
 actual doctrine of the Church, as derived by us 
 from these three sources. But let it not be 
 understood that we mean that all its points, 
 though held, as we believe, by the Apostles, 
 were taught by them with equal prominence. 
 Some are more important than others in them- 
 selves ; and some — as, for instance, that of the 
 Resurrection of our Lord — were more necessary 
 to be insisted on at the times in which they 
 lived and had to work. With regard to others^ 
 also, as is simple matter of history, we know 
 that instruction was in the early ages given 
 secretly — that is, only to those who had been 
 baptized ; in order that doctrines which were 
 difl&cult or mysterious might not be exposed 
 to public ridicule or misinterpretation. This 
 
 discipline of the secret,*' as it was called, 
 applied specially to the dogma of the Real 
 Presence of Christ in the consecrated elements. 
 
 Again, other matters of faith, though very 
 fundamental and important, were not^so much 
 insisted on in various ages of the Church as in 
 others, because they were not then denied or 
 called in questioai. Indeed the definitions of 
 tUe Church, the bringings of its faith to the 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith, 63 
 
 surface as it were, have generally been oc- 
 casioned by the spread of opinions contrary to 
 that • faith. Thus, the doctrine of the Holy 
 Trinity itself was not clearl}^ defined for about 
 three hundred years after Christ, when the 
 definition was required by the emergencies of 
 the time ; and so one point of faith after another 
 has been specially emphasized by definitions as 
 the times may seem to demand. 
 
 The creed or collection of dogmas, then, 
 which I am about to present, need not all 
 have been taught with equal prominence ox 
 emphasis by the Apostles ; there may, indeed, 
 have been other matters to which they devoted 
 more attention than to some of these. But 
 these are the ones most important to be under- 
 stood and formally or explicitly accepted at 
 present ; they constitute the profession or 
 declaration of faith made by converts to the 
 Church when they are received into it ; and 
 naturally the ones to which the greatest interest 
 attaches. 
 
 This profession or declaration of faith is, 
 then, as follows : 
 
 **/ (the name is here given), having before my eyes 
 the holy Gospels^ which I touch with my hand, and 
 knowing that^no one can be saved without that faith 
 which the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church holds y 
 believes, and teaches, against which I grieve that 1 
 have greatly erred, inasmuch as I have held and believ* 
 €d doctrines opposed to her teaching : 
 
64 The Principal Points cf Catholic Faith. 
 
 InoWy with grief and contrition for my past errors^ 
 profess that I believe the Holy Catholic Apostolic 
 Roman Church to be the only and true Church estab^ 
 lished on earth by Jesus Christy to which I submit my* 
 self with my whole heart, I believe all the articles 
 that she proposes to my belief and I reject and con* 
 demn all that she rejects and condemns^ and I am 
 ready to observe all that she commands me. And 
 especially y I profess that I believe 
 
 One only God in three divine Persons ^ distinct 
 from, and equal to each other — that is to say^ the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; 
 
 ** The Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation^ Passion^ 
 Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and 
 the personal unio7i of the two Natures, the divine and 
 the human; the divine Maternity of the most holy 
 Maty, together with her most spotless Virginity ; 
 
 ** The true^ real, and substantial presence of the Body 
 and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, in the most holy Sacrament of the 
 Eucharist ; 
 
 The seven Sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ for 
 the salvation of mankind ; that is to say. Baptism, 
 Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, 
 Order, Matrimony ; 
 
 ^''Purgatory, the Resurrection of the dead, Everlast^ 
 ing life; 
 
 ** The Primacy, not only of honor, but also of juris* 
 diction, of the Roman Tbntiff, successor of St. P^ter^ 
 Prince of the Apostles, Vicar of Jesus Christ ; 
 
 ** The veneration of the Saints, and of their images ; 
 
 •* The authority of the Apostolic and Ecclesiastical 
 Traditions, and of the Holy Scriptures, which we must 
 interpret and understand only in the sense which our 
 holy mother the Catholic Church has held^ and does 
 holdi 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 65 
 
 And everything else that has been defined^ and 
 declared by the sacred Canons, and by the general 
 Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trenty 
 and delivered, defined, and declared by the General 
 Council of the Vatican, especially concerning the Pri- 
 macy of the Roman Pontiff, and his infallible teaching 
 authority, 
 
 ** With a sincere heart, therefore, and with unfeigned 
 faith^ I detest and abjure every error, heresy, and sect 
 opposed to the said Holy Catholic and Apostolic 
 Roman Church, So help me God, and these His holy 
 Gospels y which I touch with my hand.'^ 
 
 The preamble, in which it is stated that no 
 one can be saved without the Catholic faith, and 
 that the convert is ready to do what the Church 
 commands, I shall discuss later on, when it will 
 be better understood. At present we will con- 
 fine ourselves to the definite articles proposed. 
 
 In them you have the Catholic creed in all 
 its principal points. There are some others 
 naturally following from or connected with 
 these ; but it is safe to say that none will give 
 you difficulty if these do not. I shall, however, 
 touch on some matters not directly mentioned 
 here ; for it is not the desire of the Church to 
 keep anything back ; the * ' discipline of the 
 secret,*' mentioned above, though no doubt 
 necessary in its day, is not observed at present. 
 
 But no doubt some of the points given here 
 may present some difficulty, and some you may 
 misunderstand as you read them, either on 
 
66 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 account of the brevity with which they are ex- 
 pressed* or because of the false notions about 
 them which you may have entertained. I^et us 
 then look at them more carefully and see how 
 much diflSculty, if any, remains after our ex- 
 amination. 
 
 It is likely that some will ; especially as we 
 shall not in these pages discuss matters very 
 minutely, and you will not have a chance to ask 
 questions or propose doubts. I only want now 
 to show you, if possible, that the Catholic faith 
 is not such a monstrous or unreasonable thing 
 as you may have imagined ; the only way to 
 settle every question that may occur is to go to 
 some priest, or if you cannot make up your 
 mind to that, to consult some well-instructed 
 Catholic ; but of course the priest is the best 
 one to talk to, for he has made these matters his 
 special study ; and he will probably be able to 
 appoint some time to talk to you, if too busy 
 
 just when you happen to call on him. You 
 will probably find him to have more in common 
 with yourself than you suppose, even though he 
 may be a foreigner by birth ; and he will very 
 likely be an American citizen by birth, not 
 merely by adoption ; and it is not so difficult to 
 find a priest who has been a Protestant, and 
 who will understand, by his own experience, 
 
 just what your ideas and your difficulties are. 
 Now let us look at the articles of faith given 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith, 67 
 
 above. The first is: '''One only God in three 
 divine Persons^ disiincf from, and equal to each 
 other — that is to say, the Father, the Son, and the 
 Holy Ghost:' ' 
 
 No doubt this is a doctrine which in itself 
 presents difficulty ; it is a great mystery, one 
 peculiar to the Christian faith, and one which 
 we cannot hope to understand thoroughly, still 
 less to convince ourselves of by reasoning. But 
 then the difficulty which it presents is one to 
 which probably you have been accustomed ; foi 
 almost all Christian denominations hold and 
 teach this same doctrine. Protestantism made 
 no protest on this point ; the Greek Church of 
 course teaches it, and so do all the churches of 
 the 'East. So we need not consider it as an 
 objection to the Catholic Church in particular; 
 it would rather be so if she did not teach it; 
 and we may, in spite of the great importance of 
 this doctrine, pass on to something else. 
 
 Next we have ' ' the CutJwlic doctrine of the 
 Incarnation, Passion, Death, and Resurrection of 
 our Lord fesus Christ,^ 
 
 Here again we have something substantially 
 the same as what the great majority of Protest- 
 ants maintain. I will state — though very pro- 
 bably you know already — what Incarnation 
 means. It m,eans simply that the Son of God, 
 the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, 
 Father, Son/ and Holy Ghost, took our human 
 
68 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 nature, and became man as well as God, in the 
 person of our Lord Jesus Christ. Almost all 
 Protestants, as I have said, also believe this; 
 but they are not always very clear about just 
 the time and the way in which this wonder 
 ful work was accomplished. Some, I think, 
 believe that the man Christ became divine only 
 when the Holy Ghost descended on him at the 
 time of his baptism. Some, perhaps, regard 
 him to have been so at his birth, but not before. 
 But the Apostles' Creed, which most Protest- 
 ants recite or at least believe, is quite clear on 
 this point. It says, He was conceived by the 
 Holy Ghost.'* What does this mean, except 
 that His conception in the womb of the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary, His mother, was the occasion on 
 which this wonderful ' ' Incarnation ' ' occurred ? 
 And the Bible seems really quite plain in its 
 teaching about this matter. 
 
 However, as you see, there is no charge or 
 protest against the Catholic Church about its 
 teaching in this respect made by Protestants. 
 The mass of them believe just as we do, that 
 the Son of God became incarnate" — that is, 
 took human nature upon Himself in the womb 
 of His Blessed Mother, at the time when the 
 Angel Gabriel appeared to her, as narrated in 
 the first chapter of St. lyuke's Gospel. 
 
 Now next as to the Passion of Christ. Of 
 course this simply means His sufferings im- 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith, 69 
 
 mediately previous to and in connection with 
 His death ; specially His crucifixion. But 
 what is the meaning of saying that we hold this 
 as a doctrine ? For it is simply a well-estab- 
 lished fact of history, is it not ? Very few, 
 certainly, doubt it. Both Jews and pagans 
 bore, and still bear, testimony to it. ' 
 
 The doctrine, then, of Christ's Passion and 
 Death must be something different from the 
 mere assertion of the fact that He suffered and 
 died. And it is. The Catholic doctrine about 
 it is not merely that Christ suffered and died, 
 but that He suffered and died for us ; that by 
 His suffering and death He accomplished a 
 most wonderful work, making by means of it 
 satisfaction for the sins of the whole world ; and 
 not only making a satisfaction, but making the 
 only satisfaction which ever has been, or ever 
 will be, made for our sins ; so that it is in that 
 suffering and death of His that all our hope 
 must be placed. The Catholic doctrine of the 
 Passion and Death of Christ is that Christ is our 
 only Saviour and Redeemer ; that, as St. Peter 
 says (Acts iv. 12), /'there is no other name 
 under heaven given to men whereby we must be 
 saved.*' ^' 
 
 Well, here again, what charge would Protest- 
 ants in general want to make against the 
 Catholic Church? Every Christian who be- 
 lieves that we need to be saved at all, believes 
 
7o The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 that we must be saved by Christ's sufferings 
 and death. 
 
 You have been perhaps accustomed to be- 
 lieve, you have been told, it may be, from 
 your childhood, that we Catholics, or ''Roman- 
 ists" as they sometimes call us, believe that it 
 is our own good works that win heaven for us ; 
 that we put the merits of Christ quite into the 
 background. But you see this is a great 
 mistake. Christ is our Saviour, and there is no 
 other which can take His place ; this is nothing 
 new which Martin lyUther or any other Protest- 
 ant brought to light ; it has been the Catholic 
 teaching from the beginning. 
 
 Next we have mention of the Resurrection of 
 Christ. We perhaps need not say much about 
 this, for though it is a miraculous event, in 
 which we believe by faith, and not a simple 
 matter * of ordinary history, still the whole 
 Christian world accepts it as a certainty. No 
 Christian believes that Christ's body decayed 
 like others in the tomb to which it was con- 
 signed, or even that it was stolen away to follow 
 the laws of nature in any other place, or to be 
 otherwise disposed of by His disciples. The 
 practically universal belief of all who call them- 
 selves Christians is that, as recorded in all the 
 gospels, Christ arose from the tomb in which 
 His really dead body lay, on the Sunday morn- 
 ing following His crucifixion ; and that he 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 71 
 
 J» I ■ I .. . I I ■ ■ ■ I ■ I .. . . ,1 ■■ I I I I ... > ■ II 
 
 arose to die no more, but to live in the flesh a 
 glorious and immortal life. 
 
 They believe also that His risen body was 
 not, as before, subject to pain, fatigue, or any 
 of the ills of this life, and that it had qualities 
 of a supernatural character, evident from the 
 gospel narratives, which will be more fully ex- 
 plained when we come to speak of the resurrec- 
 tion of the dead. Here, then, the Catholic 
 Church has no issue or trouble with any other 
 Christian denominations, except with such who, 
 while calling themselves Christians, reject the 
 supernatural altogether from the life of Christ. 
 We may, therefore, pass on, since, as has beea 
 said from the outset, we are not undertaking a 
 formal defence of the Christian faith against 
 other quite different religions, nor against in- 
 fidelity and rationalism. 
 
 What have we next ? * * The personal union 
 of the two Natures^ the divine and the human J* ^ 
 
 This concerns a point of what may be called 
 accurate theology, about which in these days 
 people do not generally trouble themselves 
 much. And it is not a point of real controversy 
 at present among those who believe in the 
 Divinity of Christ, though many have no doubt 
 quite loose and unsettled notions on the subject. 
 
 In the early days of the Church, however, 
 ther§ a good deal of dispute ^bo^t Ibis 
 
72 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 
 
 Some held that there was a double personal- 
 ity in Christ ; two really distinct persons, one 
 Divine, the other human, under the same bodily 
 form. 
 
 Theae were called Nestorians, from their 
 leader, Nestorius, Archbishop of Constanti- 
 nople. Their doctrine was condemned as false 
 and heretical at the General Council of 
 Ephesus, A.D. 431, and it disappeared for the 
 most part from the Church, though there are 
 some who profess it even to this day among the 
 Christians of the far East. You may have seen 
 the name in the papers ; their reunion with th^ 
 Catholic Church was spoken of some time ago. 
 
 This doctrine having been condemned, some, 
 went too far in the other direction, and main- 
 tained that there was no human nature iii 
 Christ ; that there was only one nature, as there 
 was only one person. These were called Eu- 
 tychians, from their leader Eutyches, a monk of 
 Constantinople ; or more significantly Monophy- 
 sites, a Greek word signifying one nature {mo7ios, 
 one or single, and physis, nature) . This belief 
 was also declared to be contrary to the true 
 faith in the General Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 
 451, and it never prevailed to any great extent 
 subsequently ; but as there are still some 
 Nestorians, so also there are still some Mo- 
 XKjphysites, The Copts of Egypt are such, v 
 
 But neither of these doctrines is formally 
 
The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 73 
 
 maintained by Christians, whether Catholic or 
 Protestant, in Europe or America. All among 
 us who believe in Christ's Godhead or Divinity, 
 whether they be Catholic or Protestant, believe 
 that Christ was both God and man, in one 
 single personality. 
 
 And indeed it is clear that, were it otherwise, 
 His suflFerings and death would not avail for our 
 redemption, in the view of those who believe 
 that redemption or atonement for our sins was 
 needed. A merely human person could not 
 suflSce to make this atonement ; on the other 
 hand, a human nature was needed in ord^r that 
 suffering and death might be possible. 
 
 1 think, then, that there are few so-called 
 orthodox Protestants who will have any fault to 
 find with the Catholic Church here ; though 
 such Protestants do not all see the consequences 
 which naturally follow from this doctrine, as 
 will be evident a little farther on. 
 
 The next article is : * * the divine Maternity 
 of the most holy Mary, together with her most 
 spotless Virginity.'' Here we come to what 
 seems to be a point at issue ; and we will give 
 to it, and to the general teaching of the Church 
 about the Blessed Virgin, a separate chapter. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE BI.BSSBD VIRGIN MARY. 
 
 "llrHAT, then, is meant by these words^ 
 the divine Maternity of the most holy 
 Mary ? 
 
 It is meant that she,4s truly and properly 
 called, as the Catholic Church calls her, the 
 Mother of God. This title was definitely given 
 to her by the Council of Ephesus, of which I 
 have just spoken, and is given to her by all 
 Catholics in the prayer which we call the 
 
 Hail Mary/' We say in that prayer : Hail 
 Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now 
 and at the hour of our death.'* 
 
 It is quite likely that you may object to this 
 title, and be scandalized by it. But that is be- 
 cause you do not rightly understand what it 
 means. 
 
 I remember seeing mention of it made in a 
 Protestant catechism which I was once teaching 
 in a Sunday-school. It spoke of this title as 
 being a wrong one given by Romanists, and re- 
 marked that the Virgin Mary was Christ's 
 mother only as to His human nature." 
 
 This, of course, implied that Romanists,** or 
 Catholics, regarded her as the mother of the 
 
 74 
 
The Blessed Virgin Mary, 75 
 
 Divine Nature. And this idea, I feel sure, is 
 quite prevalent among Protestants about us. 
 
 And yet the notion is so absurd a one that it 
 hardly seems to bear discussion. How could 
 there be a Mother of the Divine Nature ? Such 
 an idea would at once make that Nature not 
 Divine. For the Nature of God is necessarily 
 self-existing, and from all eternity. It could 
 not be Divine, and yet have a Mother. It 
 would follow from this that we Catholics do not 
 mean God when we use the word, and that the 
 Blessed Virgin is our real God, if we have any 
 at all, strictly speaking. 
 
 And such, I. am afraid, is the idea that many 
 Protestants have of us. If they would only 
 examine, they would see how false it is ; they 
 would see that what we teach must be taught 
 unless we wish to be Nestorians. 
 
 They would see that no woman could be a 
 mother of a nature simply. Any mother is the 
 mother of 2i person, not merely of a nature. The 
 person has a nature of course, but it is not mere- 
 ly the nature which is born of the mother, but 
 the person. 
 
 Very well then. The Blessed Virgin Mary 
 was the Mother of Christ ; that is granted by 
 all. But Christ was a single person, having a 
 Divine as well as a human nature ; this is ad- 
 mitted by orthodox Protestants. And this per- 
 son Christ is properly called Divine ; that is 
 
76 
 
 The Blessed Virgin Mary. 
 
 also plain enough ; He is called simply God 
 by Protestants themselves; His personality is 
 Divine. The Blessed Virgin was the one who 
 brought God into the world ; and that is all that 
 we mean by calling her the mother of God. The 
 title was given, and is used, as a protest against 
 the Nestorian heresy that there were two per- 
 sons, one Divine and one human, and that only 
 the human person was born into the world. 
 Protestants need not worry themselves about it 
 at all, for they hold just the same thing them- 
 selves. 
 
 It is, then, only in appearance that there is a 
 point at issue here. But no doubt there is a 
 real disagreement on some points about the 
 Blessed Mother of God between Protestants and 
 Catholics. 
 
 For one thing, Protestants do not seem to like 
 to call her ''blessed," as Catholics regularly do. 
 This is really strange on their part, for we find 
 right down in their own Bible (lyuke i. 48) 
 ''from henceforth all generations shall call me 
 blessed." It is the same in ours too ; and now 
 I will just remark that in the quotations I have 
 made thus far from the Bible I have used the 
 Catholic version, and shall continue to do so, as 
 a rule, and this for several reasons; first, because 
 we believe it to be the best ; secondly, that you 
 may be quite sure that we have one in English ; 
 and thirdly, that you may see how little differ- 
 
The Blessed Virgin Mary. 77 
 
 ence, on the whole, there is between it and the 
 Protestant one. 
 
 What reason have Protestants for objecting to 
 do what the Bible says all generations will do ? 
 It is really hard to see ; for even if the Mother 
 of Christ was merely an ordinary woman like 
 any other, certainly she was very fortunate and 
 blessed in having for her Son the Redeemer of 
 the world. 
 
 I can see no reason, unless that they want to 
 keep her down, as it were ; it looks as if they 
 thought there was some danger of her being 
 more highly honored than her Son, and that 
 some sort of repression was called for. To 
 Catholics this idea would never occur; we 
 would not think of comparing the Blessed 
 Virgin with God ; highly exalted as we believe 
 her to be among creatures, the same infinite 
 gap always remains in our minds between her 
 and God that must necessarily be between the 
 creature and the Creator. 
 
 Really this fear, this nervousness as it were, 
 about a rivalry between the two, seems very 
 amusing to us sometimes. I once knew a 
 Protestant woman who on seeing a statue of the 
 Blessed Virgin holding her Divine Infant in her 
 arms, as she must so frequently have done, said 
 that it * ' gave her a shiver to see the Virgin so 
 large, and the Saviour so small*'! Such a 
 strange conceit could not occur to a Catholic. 
 
78 The Blessed Virgin Mary. 
 
 Such representations only impress on us, as it 
 seems that they naturally must upon all Chris-* 
 tians, the immense condescension of God in 
 becoming 'a little child for our sake, and the 
 great dignity He was pleased to confer on His 
 Mother, and similarly on His foster-father St. 
 Joseph, in being, as the Scripture says, sub- 
 ject to them (lyuke ii. 51). 
 
 But of course there is some difference be- 
 tween the Catholic and Protestant teachings 
 with regard to the Blessed Virgin, as I have 
 said. Protestants, as a rule, I think, do regard 
 her as simply in herself nothing but an ordinary 
 woman; a good, pious, and holy woman, cer- 
 tainly; I hardly think they doubt that; but 
 still not in any way specially or distinctly su- 
 perior to many others. I suppose they would 
 all agree that she is in heaven ; but they do not 
 look upon her as occupying any special or 
 exalted place there. ' - 
 
 The reason, probably, for this really peculiar 
 opinion of theirs — for it is peculiar, the Greek 
 and all the Oriental churches having the 
 Catholic view about her — is that they do not 
 attach any weight to anything that is not right 
 down in the text of the Bible. Sometimes, as 
 in the instance I gave a little while ago, it 
 really seems as if they did not notice very much 
 some things that are in that text ; but at any 
 rate, they do not go beyond it. This is in it* 
 
The Blessed Virgin Mary. 79 
 
 self unreasonable ; it is something the same as 
 if we admitted no evidence about the great men 
 who founded our government except what could 
 be obtained from the study of the Constitution. 
 But this point has already been sufl&ciently dis- 
 cussed ; and I trust you have** seen that the 
 Catholic belief that other evidence on doctrinal 
 points is admissible is reasonable enough, to 
 say the least. 
 
 Admitting such evidence, it is plain enough 
 that the Blessed Virgin did occupy in the mind 
 of the Church a peculiar and [separate position 
 from that of other saints and holy persons, from 
 the first ages of Christianity. We find as 
 strong things said about her when the Church 
 came out of the pressure of persecution, and 
 had a chance to fully publish her doctrine, as 
 now. We find it constantly maintained that 
 she was not only good, but even sinless ; and 
 surely, though Protestants may not see how this 
 can be established, at least none urge anything 
 against it, or bring in any way against her any 
 definite charge or blame of any kind ; and 
 many of tliem even admit it, though not as [a 
 matter of absolute belief or certainty. 
 
 Then, again, there is a constant tradition that 
 she was after her death taken bodily away 
 from this world ; that as our Divine lyord as- 
 ceijded corporally into heaven, so His Bkssed 
 Mother tip, or a-^mid thor^, This 
 
8o 
 
 The Blessed Virgin Mary. 
 
 event is celebrated in the feast of the Assump- 
 tion, as we call it. And I would like to call 
 your attention to the probability of this, from 
 the fact that no one ever pretended to collect 
 any relics of the Blessed Virgin, except of such 
 a nature that she might have parted with them 
 during life, and that no one has claimed or now 
 claims that her body actually rests anywhere on 
 earth. Such claims would undoubtedly have 
 been made, had it been possible to make them ; 
 for no one can suppose that the actual tomb of 
 the body of one so intimately related to Christ 
 would have been neglected by Christians, oi 
 that they would not have collected what sou- 
 venirs were attainable of one who must have 
 been so dear to Him and to them. 
 
 To say that her remains were hid away, as 
 the Jews pretended that those of Christ were, 
 would merely be saying that Romanism began 
 very early, and was indeed identified with 
 Christianity itself. But such an idea, either 
 with regard to our Divine Lord or to His 
 Blessed Mother, is really unreasonable ; no se- 
 cret of such importance could be so well kept. 
 
 However, it is not necessary to argue further 
 to prove this point, or even to show that it is 
 not improbable ; for it has never been defined 
 as an article of Catholic faith, though it is uni- 
 versally believed by Catholics. 
 
 The other matter which is given in the pro- 
 
The Blessed Virgin Mary, 8i 
 
 fession of faith which we are examining is the 
 spotless or absolute Virginity of Mary. This is 
 generally conceded by Christians, as all call 
 her Virgin, though all do not prefix the title 
 Blessed. The only questions which could well 
 be raised about it would be as to whether 
 Christ Himself was the son of Joseph, and 
 whether He had any brothers or sisters, in the 
 sense in which we would use the word. Both 
 these ideas are rejected by orthodox Protest- 
 ants, the brothers or sisters mentioned in the 
 Gospel being understood to be merely near 
 relatives. The Catholic faith, therefore, pre- 
 sents no more difiiculties in this matter than 
 that of Protestants in general. 
 
 There is another matter of faith, however, 
 with regard to the Blessed Virgin Mary which 
 should be explained, as it has been much mis- 
 understood, and is of considerable importance. 
 It has been often mentioned in these last few 
 decades, especially since its solemn definition as 
 an article of faith by Pius IX. in 1854, and you 
 have probably often heard of it. It is what is 
 known as the Immaculate Conception ; and on 
 account of the special interest attaching to it, 
 we will make it the subject of a special chapter. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THH IMMACUI.ATE) CONC^P'TION, 
 
 THE particular dogma of the Church which 
 we are about to consider seems to furnish 
 a specially good illustration of a fact evident 
 enough to Catholics ; that is, that most of the 
 objections made by Protestants to our religion 
 come from their not understanding what that 
 religion really teaches. It is quite plain that 
 hardly any of the objectors to the Immaculate 
 Conception have any idea of what is meant by 
 the words. 
 
 Some seem to think that it refers to the su- 
 pernatural conception of our Divine lyord in the 
 womb of His Blessed Mother; and it seems 
 certainly strange that with this notion they 
 should object to it, for this doctrine is plainly 
 laid down in the Apostles' Creed, which almost 
 all Christians profess, in the words, * * He was 
 conceived by the Holy Ghost.'* It is also 
 clearly taught in the Bible itself (Luke ii. 35). 
 
 Others, again, see in it a sort of deification of 
 
 the Blessed Virgin herself; they think that it 
 
 means to say that ^he is in some way equal to 
 
 God; though why they should entertain this 
 
 idea seems to us quite strange. It is only to be 
 82 
 
The Immaculate Conception. 83 
 
 accounted for by their having that notion firmly 
 fixed in their minds already, so that anything 
 which appears to point in that direction tends to 
 increase or intensify that conviction. 
 
 Others still, paying somewhat closer attention 
 to the words as they stand, gather from them 
 the meaning that the Church regards the con- 
 ception of Mary as supernatural in the same 
 sense in which that of her Divine Son was ; 
 that we believe that she too was * * conceived by 
 the Holy Ghost/' -They think, then, that if it 
 does not mean that she was actually divine, it 
 certainly must mean that she is in some way 
 more than human; a goddess in some sense, 
 though not perhaps equal to God Himself. 
 
 How strange it is that they will never take 
 the trouble to inquire of some one who really 
 knows what this doctrine is, or to get some 
 book which would give them information. If 
 they would do so, they would find, very likely, 
 that their objections would disappear; at any 
 rate, it would seem to them a small addition to 
 what they are already willing enough to accept. 
 
 What, then, is this doctrine? In the first 
 place, it is not any raising of the Mother of God 
 above the plane of human nature. The Church 
 does not mean by the words * * Immaculate Con- 
 ception ' ' that Mary was conceived by the Holy 
 Ghost; on the contrary, she teaches that she 
 was conceived and born of human parents ; her 
 
84 The Immaculate Conception. 
 
 father* s name is believed to have been Joachim, 
 her mother's Anna. All that is meant is that 
 she v^as not only from the time of her birth, but 
 from the moment of her conception, a perfectly 
 innocent or sinless child. 
 
 That is no more than what many Christians 
 believe is the case with every child that comes 
 into this world. And of course the Church 
 thinks so too, if by sin is meant actual sin ; that 
 is to say, sin actually committed by thought, 
 word, or .deed. For it is plain that no child can 
 commit sin before coming to an age when it 
 becomes aware of the difference between right 
 and wrong ; the age of reason, as we commonly 
 call it. 
 
 But there is another thing which is known as 
 sin, besides that which is actually committed ; 
 it is what is called original sin, and this also is 
 believed in by orthodox Protestants as well as 
 by Catholics. What is meant by it is this : 
 that Adam in his sin, as narrated in the book 
 of Genesis, lost the right to heaven; and that 
 from that time — that is, from the very beginning 
 of our race — his descendants have also lost that 
 title to heaven. A Redeemer, however, was 
 promised immediately after Adam*s sin, who 
 was to restore the right to heaven which had 
 been lost ; and Christians generally acknow- 
 ledge that it will be restored to those who be- 
 lieve in Him. Furthermore Catholics and 
 
The Immaculate Conception. 85 
 
 many Protestants believe that it is restored even 
 to infants incapable of belief by their being 
 baptized. 
 
 Now, what the Church teaches with regard to 
 the Blessed Virgin is simply this : that to her, 
 by a special privilege, on account of her having 
 been selected as the Mother of the Redeemer, 
 this rigiit to heaven was restored even before 
 her birth, at the very instant of her conception ; 
 that what we call the stain of original sin never 
 was upon her. That is what the word * * im- 
 maculate means. Macula, in I^atin, means a 
 stain or spot; immaculate,'* then, means free 
 from stain ; and to say ' ' Immaculate Concep- 
 tion*' simply means, then, that her human 
 nature was free at its very conception from this 
 stain or spot of sin, being in that respect like 
 that of her Divine Son. But this does not for a 
 moment imply that she had any Divine Nature, 
 as her Son had ; nor does any Catholic dream 
 of understanding it in that way. 
 
 Now, what objection can possibly attach to 
 this, except that no positive proof of it may ap- 
 pear ? No reason can be stated why it should 
 not have been so ; there is no impiety or idola- 
 try in it. Of course, if one is to take nothing as 
 belonging to the Christian faith but what is 
 plainly or unquestionably stated in the Bible, 
 one will not believe or accept it ; but if one will 
 leave this, which I think has been fairly shown 
 
86 The Immaculate Conception. 
 
 in what precedes to be unreasonable ground, 
 there is hardly anything in which the consent 
 of the Christian world previous to the Protes- 
 tant Reformation, or since that outside of the 
 influence of that Reformation, has been more 
 unanimous. The Greek and other Oriental 
 churches do not formally state it ; but it i^^ quite 
 safe to say that their members would not and 
 do not reject it, for the devotion to the Blessed 
 Virgin has been, if anything, greater with them 
 than even in the Roman Church. And the 
 question about it among Catholics, which did 
 exist before the solemn definition in 1854, was 
 not so much whether it was a true doctrine, 
 but rather whether it was a matter, properly 
 speaking, of the faith ; or whether the original 
 stain did not rest for an instant, as it were, on 
 Mary, being removed the instant afterward; 
 attaching to her, as we may say, purely as a 
 matter of form. These doubts were not very 
 grave ones, and all were probably glad to have 
 them removed. 
 
 Try, then, to clear away the prejudices and 
 imaginations which you may have entertained 
 about this very simple matter, and if you do 
 not agree with us and the great majority of 
 Christendom about it, do not think that we are 
 idolaters because^ we think as we do. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THK HOI.Y KUCHARIST. 
 
 THE next article which we find in our pro 
 fession is as follows : ''the true, real^ and 
 substantial presence of the Body and Bloody together 
 with the Soul and Divinity^ of our Lord Jesus 
 Christy in the most holy Sacrament of the Eu- 
 charist. 
 
 In this we have the statement of one of the 
 great mysteries of the faith; one which, as I 
 have said, was in the beginning kept a profound 
 secret, so far as possible, from the world outside 
 the Christian pale, and only communicated to 
 those who had been received into it. At pres- 
 ent, and for a long time past, the discipline has 
 been different ; it is now explained, as far as it 
 can be, to all who desire to know it ; and yet 
 very many, as did the Jews in the time of our 
 Lord Himself, misunderstand and misrepre- 
 sent it. 
 
 Perhaps this is not so much to be wondered 
 at ; for it is, of course, a matter impossible for 
 us here to thoroughly understand. But that 
 should only dispose us to try to understand it 
 better ; for that it is taught by our blessed lyord 
 Himself quite explicitly, cannot be denied. 
 87 
 
88 
 
 The Holy Eucharist, 
 
 Please turn in your Bible to the sixth chapter 
 of St. John's Gospel. I will quote here from 
 your own version, for that you will not gainsay. 
 We read in verse. 51 : ''I am the living bread 
 which came down from heaven ; if any man ea^ 
 of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the 
 bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will 
 give for the life of the world.'' 
 
 The Jews who heard Him, as I have said, 
 misunderstood this, and were shocked at it. 
 They said (v. 52), How can this man give us 
 his flesh to eat? 
 
 Now, Protestants generally say that our Lord 
 only meant this figuratively; that He did not 
 mean that any one was to receive Him sub- 
 stantially, but only to commune with Him in a 
 spiritual manner. And indeed we agree that it 
 is only the spiritual union with Him that is of 
 use ; the merely material or corporal reception 
 of His body would be of no avail, as we read 
 below {v. 63). But if there was, after all, to be 
 no actual reception of Him corporally, He 
 could easily have removed all their objections 
 by saying at once that a spiritual communion 
 was all that was intended. But instead of this, 
 He goes on (v. 53): ''Verily, verily, I say 
 unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
 man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in 
 you.'* If what He had said was merely a 
 metaphor, why not explain it away ; but no, He 
 
Th'e Holy Eucharist. 
 
 89 
 
 goes on to state it even more strongly than 
 before. 
 
 Why should He do this, if not to show un- 
 mistakably that there really was to be a 
 mysterious substantial reception of Him, im- 
 parting great spiritual blessings which could 
 not otherwise be received ; having for its object 
 these spiritual blessings, but requiring this 
 means for their, attainment ? And, if his hear- 
 ers had all accepted all that Protestants say 
 was meant — and certainly any one who believed 
 in Him even as a good and holy man might do 
 that, there being now no other mystery than 
 this definitely proposed as a test of their faith — 
 why should He say, there are some of you that 
 believe not'* (v. 64)? And why should some 
 of them actually ^ * go back and walk no more 
 with him'' (v. 66) except that they, like Protest- 
 ants, felt that this mystery about the reception 
 of His flesh and blood was something too hard 
 for them to accept ? It could hardly have been 
 the allusion to His death or to His ascension 
 which drove them away. These were not the 
 points against which they had protested. ^ 
 
 But after all, we must not get into contro- 
 versy. I only want to call your attention to this 
 matter, and have you think of it yourselves. 
 
 We all know that this mystery was afterward 
 Still more solemnly proclaimed by our Saviour 
 when, at the I^ast Supper, He took bread, as all 
 
90 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 the evangelists except St. John record, and said^ 
 "This is my body," and wine, saying, **This 
 is my blood,'' and told them to receive these, 
 and to continue to do what He had then done, 
 in remembrance of Him. 
 
 Here again, of course, I know it is said that 
 His words were only to be taken in a spiritual 
 sense; that He meant **This represents my 
 body, or my blood, ' ' and nothing more. 
 
 Perhaps ; but if so, is it not rather strange 
 that He should have allowed them to misunder- 
 stand Him, as they seem certainly to have done? 
 Even if it is claimed that the Apostles and first 
 Christians had the present views of Protestants 
 about this matter, it must be conceded that the 
 words of Christ were understood literally very 
 soon afterward; that this literal sense is 
 brought forward and insisted on repeatedly by 
 the Christian writers of early times, and that 
 there is no trace of any protest against it up to 
 the times of the Reformation. Christendom 
 seems to have been more singularly in accord 
 about this matter than about any other; the 
 quarrels and controversies of the growing 
 Church did not concern it ; all agreed and took 
 for granted that Christ was really present in the 
 Holy Communion, or Eucharist, of which all 
 partook; that the consecrated bread and wine 
 became indeed and in truth His Body and His 
 Blood. 
 
The Holy Eucharist. 91 
 
 It seems hardly credible that Almighty God 
 should have allowed such a gigantic delusion to 
 fasten itself on the Church in its very cradle, and 
 to remain in it for fifteen centuries, inducing all 
 Christians to the worship of bread and wine. 
 One word from Christ Himself at the beginning 
 would so easily have stopped it ; and afterward 
 some one, at least, could have been raised up 
 by the Holy Spirit to protest against it. 
 
 But so far was this from being the case that 
 even Luther himself, the great apostle of the 
 Reformation, believed in it as firmly as any 
 one else, as did also many others who protested 
 against Rome. Zwingle, however, does raise his 
 voice against it ; but his doctrine is looked on 
 with horror by his fellow- Reformers, so deeply 
 has the belief in the Real Presence of Christ in 
 the consecrated elements become embedded in 
 the very structure of Christianity. 
 
 It is true that doubts in a certain way had 
 been raised about this matter about three cen- 
 turies previous, principally by Berengarius. But 
 these doubts did not concern the Real Presence 
 itself, but rather the way in which the Church 
 held this doctrine. There were doubts about 
 what is called ' ' transubstantiation * * (what this 
 is will soon be explained) ; but they never took 
 any real hold on the belief of the faithful, and 
 were repudiated later even by Berengarius him- 
 self. 
 
92 
 
 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 It is time now that we should undefrstand 
 more clearly just what the Catholic faith does 
 teach on this head. \ 
 
 It is, then, that Christ not only in the Last 
 Supper made Himself really and truly present 
 in what He gave to His Apostles at that time, 
 when He said *^Take, eat; this is my body," 
 and * * Drink ye all of it ; this is my blood of 
 the new testament** (Matt. xxvi. 26-28, and 
 similarly Mark xiv. 23-24 and Luke xxii. 
 19-20), but that He also empowered them to re- 
 peat the same thing which He had done, as 
 indeed distinctly stated by St. Luke, **this do 
 in remembrance of me** (xxii. 19). 
 
 That this rite has been celebrated from the 
 very foundation of Christianity is unquestion- 
 i^ble ; and in fact all Protestant denominations 
 have retained it. It has also been generally, 
 indeed almost universally, allowed that a quali- 
 fied minister of some sort was needed for this 
 sacred rite ; that it was not a thing to be under- 
 taken by any believer in general. So it is plain 
 that Christians have never held that this was 
 something to be done only by the Apostles 
 themselves, during their lifetime; but that 
 there were to be others to whom this office 
 should be transmitted. 
 
 ^ The Catholic faith holds that those who have 
 succeeded in this respect to the office of the 
 Apostles are the bishops and priests of the 
 
The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 93 
 
 Church. To perform this rite has been always 
 regarded as the principal essential office of the 
 priest. 
 
 / He performs it in what is manifestly the 
 principal service of the Catholic Church; 
 what we call the Mass; this corresponds to 
 what Protestant denominations generally call 
 the Communion service. 
 
 \ The Mass consists first of various prayers, 
 with the reading of a part of one of the Epistles, 
 and of one of the Gospels of the New Testa- 
 ment. This portion varies according to the day 
 of the ecclesiastical calendar, or the feast which 
 is being celebrated. Then follows the offering 
 of the bread and wine which are to be conse- 
 crated; and then comes the more solemn part 
 of the service, in which the consecration of the 
 bread and the wine is made, using the sacae 
 words which Christ Himself used at the Last 
 Supper, as recorded in the Gospels. The caa- 
 secrated elements are elevated for a moment for 
 the adoration of the people ; then fellow some 
 other prayers, after which the priest receives 
 Communion, which is afterward distributed to 
 such of those present as may come forward for 
 it. After a few more prayers, and the blessing 
 of the priest given to those present, the cere- 
 mony is concluded. 
 
 Now what do we hold is accomplished by the 
 consecration ? We hold that the substance of- 
 
94 
 
 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 the bread and wine which has been offered passes 
 away, though the qualities, or accidents" 
 as they are called, remain, such, for example, as 
 the shape, color, taste, etc. For the substance 
 of the bread is substituted that of the Body of 
 Christ ; for the substance of the wine, that of 
 His Blood. 
 
 To explain accurately what is meant by sub- 
 stance would require some knowledge of meta- 
 physics ; but I think every one can see that 
 there is such a thing, and that it is different 
 from the form which this substance may 
 assume. When the substance takes a new 
 form, we call the change transformation ; when 
 the substance itself changes, the form remain- 
 ing the same, it is naturally called transubstan- 
 tiation. 
 
 I have said that lyUther himself taught that 
 Christ was really present in the consecrated 
 elements ; the divergence of his doctrine from 
 that of the Church was that he maintained that 
 the substance of the bread and wine remained 
 together with that of the Body and Blood of 
 Christ. His doctrine was therefore known as 
 consubstantiation. But both agreed, you see, as 
 to the Real Presence of Christ. 
 
 The Church further teaches that the Real 
 Presence of Christ remains as long as the form 
 remains uncorrupted ; when, however, that 
 becomes changed — as, for instance, if the taste 
 
The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 of tliL' consecrated wine should become sour, so 
 that it would no longer be considered as wine 
 but as vinegar — the Real Presence would no 
 longer remain. But as the form does always 
 remain unchanged for a considerable time, un- 
 less the elements are received in Communion, it 
 is clear that we cannot do otherwise than recog- 
 nize the Real Presence of Christ in them by the 
 same signs of adoration which we should give 
 to Christ if He were visibly present. 
 
 Now, in this it may be said we are mistaken ; 
 that the Real Presence of Christ is not in this 
 which appears to be bread and wine, any more 
 than it is anywhere else. But it cannot be 
 justly said that we are idolaters by any one 
 who believes in the Divinity of Christ, any 
 more than it could be said that we were if we 
 paid this honor to Him when concealed in any 
 other way. If He were here with His bodily 
 form as He was during His earthly life, we 
 should be justified, nay required, to pay Him 
 this honor and worship under whatever disguise 
 He might choose to conceal Himself, if we 
 believed He was really there ; and it is exactly 
 the same in this case. 
 
 You will easily see that there are great 
 mysteries attached to this doctrine, especially 
 that of the Real Presence existing in so many 
 places at once ; do not imagine that we do not 
 see these difficulties, though Catholic philoso- 
 
96 
 
 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 phy does much to remove them. But so there 
 are inscrutable mysteries connected with the 
 doctrine of the Holy Trinity, Three Persons in 
 One God. But the mystery exists because the 
 doctrine is beyond our reason, not because it is 
 contrary to it. 
 
 For it must not be imagined with regard to 
 this doctrine of the Real Presence that it is 
 opposed to any of the conclusions of science ; 
 with regard to the constitution of material 
 things, for instance. We accept without diffi- 
 culty all that sciencie has really established 
 about this, though all scientific men will ac- 
 knowledge that most of what they have to say 
 about this is of the nature of hypothesis, not of 
 discovered truth. And there is really no possi- 
 bility of any physical inquiries ever clashing 
 with the faith in this matter. For the notion 
 of substance is not a physical, but a metaphysi- 
 cal one, independent of physical researches. 
 
 We may then dismiss all such fears. The 
 only point we have really to consider is whether 
 this teaching is historically identified with the 
 Christian teaching itself; and, as has been said, 
 only one answer can be given to this question. 
 If any doctrine was held clearly and persistently 
 from the earliest ages down to the time of the 
 Reformation, it is this; and if a different doc- 
 trine had been held by the Apostles and* their 
 immediate followers, it would have b^n as 
 
The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 97 
 
 utterly impossible to introduce a tremendous 
 innovation like this without protest of which 
 we should now have some record, as it would 
 be to introduce this doctrine now into some 
 Protestant denomination without exciting con- 
 troversy. There is, then, no alternative between 
 accepting it and denying that anything definite 
 in the way of Christian faith was handed down 
 at all by the Apostles to those who listened to 
 their teaching ; and I am presuming all along 
 that you do not hold this latter view. 
 \ It is also most clearly taught in the Bible 
 itself, as we have seen; more clearly, indeed, 
 than the doctrine of the Holy Trinity itself. 
 
 It remains to say a few words on another 
 aspect which the Mass has in the mind of the 
 Catholic Church. 
 
 We read in the first Epistle of St. Paul to the 
 Corinthians (xi. 26), As often as ye eat this 
 bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the IyOrd*s 
 death till he come." These words are, as it 
 were, an explanation of those of Christ Him- 
 self in which He says that this is to be done in 
 remembrance of Him. In remembrance, that is, 
 not merely in a general or affectionate way, but 
 in remembrance of His great work, the shed- 
 ding of His Blood on the cross for our sins. 
 
 It is this that is signified by the double form 
 under which the consecration is made. The 
 breadi as even Protestants hold« represents Hia 
 
98 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 — ' ' J ■ * 
 
 Body ; the wine, His Blood, separated or shed 
 from His Body. 
 
 Now, the Catholic Church holds that though 
 by the consecrating words Christ's Body is 
 really present in the form of bread, and His 
 Blood in that of wine, still they cannot now be 
 actually separated. St. Paul tells us : Christ 
 teing raised from the dead, dieth no more; 
 death hath no more dominion over Him.'* His 
 Blood cannot be really shed again. Where His 
 Body is, then, there is His Blood ; where His 
 Blood is, there is His Body. So under each 
 form or species Christ is wholly present, living, 
 and both God and man ; as our profession says, 
 '*the Body and Blood, together with the Soul 
 and Divinity*'; not each by itself separately, 
 but all together. 
 
 Nevertheless by the outward sign of separa- 
 tion furnished by the double form or appear- 
 ance, His sacrifice and Blood-shedding on the 
 Cross is represented ; and thus we hold that in 
 the Mass, His Sacrifice made once for all upon 
 the Cross is represented and offered in a spe- 
 cially efl&cacious way. This is the great sacri- 
 ficial service of the New Law, foretold by the 
 Prophet Malachi (i. 11) : From the rising of 
 the sun even to the going down of the same my 
 name shall be great among the Gentiles ; and in 
 every place incense shall be offered unto my 
 name, and a pure offering/' This sacrifice is 
 
The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 99 
 
 also foreshadowed in that of Melchisedech, who 
 •* brought forth bread and wine, and he was the 
 priest of the most high God'' (Gen. xiv. i8) ; 
 and St. Paul says (Heb. xiii. lo) : We have 
 an altar, whereof they have no right to eat 
 which serve the tabernacle." Remember this is 
 not a new sacrifice, different from that of Christ ; 
 that is the one sacrifice, which those of the Jews 
 represented, and which alone has power to 
 atone for our sins. It is the commemoration 
 and the offering of that one sacrifice which we 
 have in the Mass ; and it is for that reason that 
 the Church attaches such great importance 
 to it. 
 
 Now one thing more. You know, perhaps, 
 that in Communion, whether received at Mass 
 or at some other time, lay people with us do not 
 partake of the cup or chalice, but receive only 
 under the form of bread. Protestants complain 
 that this is only receiving half of the Commu- 
 nion to which they are entitled ; but it is clear 
 from what was said a little while ago that Christ 
 must necessarily be entirely received under each 
 kind, as He must be really present in each, it 
 not being possible that He should be divided. 
 There is, then, nothing more to be received by 
 taking both, and to consider it necessary to give 
 or receive both would imply a doubt as to the 
 full presence of Christ in each. The matter, 
 then, is not important in this respect, as long as 
 
too 
 
 The Holy Eucharist. 
 
 the Deatfi of Christ is fully represented by the 
 consumption of both when Mass is said; and 
 for this purpose both species are received by 
 the priest. But this is not a personal privilege; 
 should he receive when not himself saying 
 Mass, he receives, like the laity, the form of 
 bread alone. 
 
 The matter is one of discipline ; and the rule 
 had to be made as it now stands, on account of 
 the impossibility of the large numbers of people 
 who go to Communion in the Catholic Church 
 receiving the form of wine without danger of 
 spilling, or of contamination in passing from 
 mouth to mouth. 
 
 Perhaps you think, by the way, that there 
 are noi so many people after all who do go to 
 Communion in the Catholic Church. This is 
 because you do not go early enough to the 
 church to see them. Few go at a late Mass, 
 because we have a law that one must take no, 
 food or drink at all from midnight till the time 
 of receiving. This law is made for the sake of 
 due reverence. So all that can do so naturally 
 go to Communion early. Go to a Catholic 
 church at six or seven o'clock of a Sunday 
 morning, and you will see quite enough to 
 satisfy you. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE SEVKN SACRAMKNTS, 
 
 OUR next article is : The seven Sacraments 
 instituted by Jesus Christ for the salvation 
 of mankind ; that is to say, Baptism, Confirma* 
 tion, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction^ 
 Order, Matrimony." 
 
 The principal difference between the Catholic 
 doctrine and that of Protestants on the point 
 here proposed is that we admit seven sacra- 
 ments, while they usually admit two, and only 
 two; namely, Baptism and Eucharist or Holy 
 Communion, if indeed they have not come to 
 regard these as merely appropriate ceremonies, 
 in spite of what our Lord says, Mark xvi. i6 
 and John vi. 54. And yet sometimes they are 
 not very clear about this. In the Episcopal 
 catechism, found in the Book of Common 
 Prayer, we find as an answer to the question 
 how many sacraments there are, ''Two only, 
 as generally necessary to salvation.'* That, 
 you see, is entirely non-committal. Being 
 necessary to salvation really has nothing to do 
 with the essence of a sacrament. It is possible 
 to be saved without any sacrament at all ; other- 
 wise no one could have been saved before the 
 101 
 
t02 The Seven Sacraments. 
 
 sacraments were instituted by Christ. And 
 even now it is possible to be saved without 
 any of the sacraments; even Baptism itself is 
 not absolutely necessary ; for one who knows 
 nothing about it, or h^s no one to baptize him, 
 can be saved if he has perfect sorrow for sin, 
 and turns to God with his whole heart, desiring 
 and purposing to do all things which He has 
 commanded. 
 
 What, then, is the idea of a sacrament, or what 
 is its true definition? It is a rite or ceremony 
 permanently instituted by Christ, for the purpose 
 of signifying some grace from God, and confer* 
 ring that grace on the soul. The first question^ 
 then, as to whether some rite or ceremony is a 
 sacrament, is whether it was ordained by Christ ; 
 the second, whether it was instituted to signify 
 some special grace, and to confer that grace on 
 all receiving it. 
 
 Now, Protestants, on account of the principle 
 which they generally hold that no certain 
 information can be obtained as to what Christ 
 did except from the Scripture, have evidently 
 exposed themselves to the risk of missing some 
 of the sacraments. And though the grace 
 which the lost sacraments confer may not be 
 one necessary to salvation, still it would be a 
 pity to lose it, all the same. So it would be 
 welL in this matter especially, to be pretty sure 
 that there is no source outside the Bible from 
 
The Seven Sacraments, loj 
 
 which we can get information as to what Christ 
 established to be done in His Church for the 
 spiritual benefit of those in it, or those desiring 
 to come in. ^ 
 
 It may be remarked, however, that it seems 
 pretty clear that on the authority of Scripture 
 alone at least two sacraments more should be 
 admitted. For we read (John xx. 22, 23) : 
 
 When he had said this, he breathed on them ; 
 and he said to them : Receive ye the Holy 
 Ghost; whose sins you shall forgive, they are 
 forgiven them ; and whose sins you shall retain, 
 they are retained.** Now, here is a definite 
 institution by Christ of a great grace which His 
 disciples — those, that is, who were present on 
 this occasion — ^were to confer on others, namely, 
 the forgiveness of their sins ; and also there is an 
 institution by Him of a certain class of persons 
 to exercise this power, or to confer this grace, 
 by which they were set apart from the rest of 
 the Christian community. 
 
 It would seem, then, plainly here that we have 
 the Sacrament of Penance, or of the absolution 
 of sin by human ministers ; and also that of 
 Order, or the setting apart of a certain order or 
 class of persons among His followers who were 
 to confer the Sacrament of Penance. And there 
 is also full as much evidence from the text of 
 the Bible that this was to be a permanent Chris- 
 tian institmtiaia ^ there is for the Sacrameat of 
 
I04 The Seven Sacraments. 
 
 Baptism. For that, too, when He committed it 
 to His Apostlesi (Matt, xxviii. 19), ** Going, 
 therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost,'* was given, as it stands, 
 merely as a personal charge ; He did not say 
 that others were to do it after them. He said, 
 it is true, that He would always be with them, 
 even to the end of the world (v. 20) ; but it 
 would be giving a strange sense to these words 
 to suppose that they only applied to the offices 
 of baptizing and teaching ; and as nothing 
 similar is recorded in connection with the Holy 
 Communion, the want of it would imply that 
 that also was only a temporary institution. 
 
 Another contradiction shows itself in the doc- 
 trine of Protestants in their not admitting the 
 washing of the feet (recorded by St. John xiii. 
 3-15) as a sacrament; for on the authority of 
 Scripture alone it has as definite a blessing or 
 grace attached to it, and is as distinctly enjoined 
 by Christ, as Baptism or Holy Communion. For 
 He said to Peter (v. 8) : If I wash thee not, 
 thou shalt have no part with me,*' and He says 
 (v. 14): '*If then I, being your Lord and 
 Master, have washed your feet, you ought also 
 to wash one another's feet." 
 
 On the face, then, of Scripture, this washing 
 of the feet is a matter seemingly of great im- 
 portance, conferring a great blessing, and cer- 
 
The Seven Sacraments^ ^ 105 
 
 tainly established by Christ ; and yet Protestants 
 have no ceremony of the kind, though it exists 
 in, the Catholic Church, being one of the cere- 
 monies of Holy Week. Catholics, however, do 
 not regard it as a sacrament; but there is no 
 way of deciding that it is not so, unless we are 
 willing to be guided by something besides the 
 mere text of Scripture itself. 
 
 And, in point of fact, Protestants have been so 
 guided. They did not take this to be a sacra- 
 ment, and why ? Simply because there was no 
 evidence that it had ever been so regarded in 
 the Church. If, then, they were so willing to 
 / take the Church's decision against this being a 
 sacrament, though the Bible seems to say that 
 it is, why not also accept the decision of the 
 Church that Confirmation, evidently practised 
 by the Apostles (Acts viii. 14-17 and xix* 
 2-6), and Extreme Unction (described by St* 
 James v. 14-15) are sacraments instituted by 
 Christ, though the Scripture does not say that 
 they were ? 
 
 It would seem that we are, in this matter at 
 least, in a mannei forced to leave the purely 
 Scriptural ground on which Protestants claim 
 to stand, and follow the more reasonable course 
 of admitting other evidence as well ; and if we 
 do so, we find at once that the seven Sacraments 
 above named have been accepted from the earli- 
 est ages of Chrfetianity' from which we can 
 
io6 The Seven Sacraments. 
 
 collect evidence ; that they are accepted by all 
 the Christian churches through the world ex- 
 cept those formed at the time of the Protestant 
 Reformation. Why, then, have such difficulty 
 about accepting them ? There is nothing idola- 
 trous or superstitious in the idea of them, unless 
 there be also in Baptism and Holy Communion. 
 
 Of the Sacrament of Penance I shall have 
 something to say later, as this matter is much 
 misunderstood by Protestants, and notions are 
 entertained by them about it which would cer- 
 tainly imply great reproach to the Church if 
 they were only true. Some remarks will also 
 be made about some of the others, especially in 
 stating the Catholic doctrine relating to mar^ 
 riage or matrimony. At present it suffices to 
 state what we believe to be the graces attached 
 to these seven Sacraments, as we hold them 
 These graces, then, are: 
 
 1. For Baptism, by which one becomes a 
 Christian, to remit all sin, original and actual, 
 and the penalty of sin, to enlighten the mind, to 
 diminish concupiscence or the desire for sin, 
 and to make the soul fruitful of good works. 
 
 2. For Confirmation, to strengthen Christians 
 to profess and maintain their faith courageously. 
 
 3. For the Eucharist, to nourish the Christian 
 life, to increase grace, to produce a distaste for 
 merely worldly things, and to draw the soul to 
 tinion with God. 
 
The Seven Sacraments. 107 
 
 4. For Penance, to remit sins committed after 
 Baptism, and to give strength for avoiding sin, 
 and persevering in a good life. 
 
 5. For Extreme Unction, to remove the re- 
 mains of sin, to relieve the souls of the sick, to 
 increase confidence in God, to give strength to 
 resist temptation, and to enable illness to be 
 supported with patience ; and sometimes to cure 
 the disease and restore health, if it be God*s will. 
 
 6. For Order, to make the ministers of Christ 
 fit for their sacred duties, to perform them with 
 due piety. This sacrament has various degrees ; 
 those ordained are bishops, priests, and dea- 
 cons. The priest has the power, by this sacra- 
 ment, of consecrating the Eucharist, and of ab- 
 solving sins ; besides this, the bishop has those 
 of giving the sacrament of Confirmation, and 
 of ordaining priests, and consecrating priests to 
 be bishops. 
 
 7. For Matrimony, to restrain inordinate con- 
 cupiscence, to give strength to bear the burdens 
 of married life, to keep conjugal fidelity, and to 
 bring up children religiously and well. 
 
 ' These, then, are the seven Sacraments, 
 honored and accepted by the Catholic Church, 
 and in constant use within her pale. Can it be 
 said that, if they really are what she claims 
 them to be, they are anything but great bless- 
 ings and mercies of God? If indeed the 
 Church taught that the gifts which they bestow 
 
io8 The Seven Sacraments. 
 
 could be obtained without any proper disposi- 
 tions on the part of the recipient ; that the for- 
 giveness of sin could be obtained, for instance, 
 in the Sacrament of Penance, without any 
 sorrow for sin or purpose of avoiding it ; then 
 indeed they would encourage Christians to 
 neglect virtue, and trust to the sacraments 
 simply as a means of escaping the consequences 
 of the sins they might commit. 
 
 But, in point of fact, the Church most dis- 
 tinctly teaches, and Catholics know very well, 
 that to obtain the blessings or graces of the 
 majority of them, it is necessary to be, before 
 attempting to receive them, in what is called 
 the state of grace; that is to say, that one*s 
 sins must have been already forgiven, that one 
 must be leading a good life, avoiding sin most 
 carefully, and loving God with one's whole 
 heart ; and that to approach them while living 
 a sinful life, to receive Communion, for example, 
 while still attached to sin and willing to commit 
 it, would not only utterly deprive the sacrament 
 of any blessing for the recipient, but would 
 make his act in receiving it a frightful sin of 
 sacrilege ; that is, it would be a profanation of 
 most sacred things ; as we read in St. PauPs 
 first epistle to the Corinthians (xi. 29) : **He 
 that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and 
 drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning 
 the body of the I^ord. " 
 
The Seven Sacraments, 109 
 
 For Christians even to marry without being 
 in the state of grace is, therefore, regarded by 
 the Church as a mortal sin of sacrilege ; and to 
 avoid this they are required to go to Confession 
 befo^re the wedding. 
 
 For the two sacraments, Baptism and Pen- 
 ance, which are intended for the forgiveness of 
 sin, it is not expected, of course, that one's sins 
 will be forgiven before approaching them. But 
 it is expected and required that if these sacra- 
 ments are to produce the eflFect of the forgive- 
 ness of actual sin, that sin must be repented of, 
 and a firm determination made to avoid it for 
 the future. 
 
 A word may be said about the Sacrament of 
 Extreme Unction. As you see by what has 
 been said above, the effect of this, as far as sin 
 is concerned, is to remove, not sin itself but its 
 remains ; for though sin is forgiven in the 
 Sacrament of Penance, so that the sinner passes 
 into the state of grace or the love of God, still 
 his soul is not restored to quite the same con- 
 dition, unless he have extraordinary penitence, 
 that it would have been in had he not sinned. 
 
 You may, however, have noticed that the 
 priest does not hesitate to give this Sacrament,, 
 or, as we say, to anoint, in cases where Catho- 
 lics even of rather careless lives ar^ struck 
 down by some accident or sudden disease, de- 
 priving them of their senses. The explanation 
 
1 10 The Seven Sacraments, 
 
 of this is, that where the Sacrament of Penance 
 is impossible, it is held that this takes its place ; 
 but here, as for Penance itself, it is not con- 
 sidered to have any effect unless the sinner has 
 interiorly made an act of true sorrow or re- 
 pentance, which is necessarily accompanied by 
 the purpose of abandoning sin for the future. 
 
 In short, we do not hold that the sacraments 
 have the effect of converting sinners or restor- 
 ing them to the state of ^^race and the favor of 
 God without their czvn co-operation by a thorough 
 and hearty repentance, , 
 
 But, it may be asked, what is the use of these 
 sacraments which confer the pardon of sin if 
 they require repentance also ? With regard to 
 Baptism, I will say now that it takes away 
 original sin, which has been already explained, 
 even from infants, and from idiots who have 
 always been incapable of making a- rational act; 
 and furthermore that it is by Baptism that we 
 become Christians and capable of receiving the 
 other sacraments, which are offered only to the 
 baptized. There is, however, more to be said 
 on this matter ; and it will be said when I come 
 to vSpeak more specially about the subject of 
 confession, later on. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 PURGATORY. 
 
 VERYBODY knows that Catholics believe 
 
 JL^ in purgatory, but few outside the Church 
 seem to have a clear notion of what we mean by 
 it. Many apparently think that we believe that 
 all Catholics are saved, but that they all, ex- 
 cept perhaps the priests, have to go to purga- 
 tory, out of which the priest will get them by his 
 prayers, or by ceremonies of some sort, if he is 
 only paid enough money for doing so. 
 
 Now try to put yourself in our place for a 
 moment. Think how you would feel if we 
 made these sweeping charges against you. Is 
 it possible that any one who recognizes the 
 principles of morality, and who has common 
 sense, could believe that a man or woman can 
 be saved by simply professing the Catholic 
 faith ? I am sorry to say that it is a matter of 
 history that Luther and the original Protestants 
 who followed him did hold that we are saved 
 by faith alone, and that the more we sin, the 
 more we glorify this saving faith; and this idea, 
 nominally, exists at the present day among 
 those who have inherited the first creeds of the 
 Reformation. But still all practically acknowl- 
 
 IIX 
 
113 Purgatory, 
 
 edge that to give proof of being a Christian in- 
 deed, one should live a good life ; that this is 
 the natural result of saving faith. And Catho- 
 lics have always held this more formally and 
 distinctly, teaching, as the Bible teaches, that 
 nothing defiled can enter heaven ; and hence, of 
 course, that if a Catholic, no matter how strong 
 his faith may be, commits mortal sin, and dies 
 without sincerely repenting of it, he goes in- 
 fallibly to hell. The principal practical differ- 
 ence between us and you is that we are more 
 strict as to what constitutes mortal or grievous 
 sin ; for instance, we believe that to give way, 
 even internally, to a lustful imagination or de- 
 sire, is a grievous sin, deserving of hell for all 
 eternity. 
 
 » It is plain, then, that we cannot believe that 
 all Catholics ate saved ; for unfortunately it is 
 not only too probable, but even we may say 
 certain, that many of them are suddenly cut off 
 in sin, or die without truly repenting and pur- 
 posing to amend it. 
 
 ? And think of the grossness of the charge that 
 your notions involve against your fellow-citi- 
 zens. How would you feel if you were a priest, 
 and were told that you undertook to get every 
 one for whom application was made out qf 
 purgatory (whatever that may be) for a money 
 consideration, and that (as is often said) you 
 worked on the feelings of poor and ignorant 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 113 
 
 people, perhaps even preaching what you did 
 not yourself believe, in order to extort money 
 from them ? 
 
 Try at least to remember that a priest is not 
 a mysterious being, evolved somehow out of the 
 depths of what you call the dark ages ; but that 
 he is a man of at any rate a fairly decent char- 
 acter in society, against whom grave charges 
 of immorality in general are seldom established ; 
 and see if it is quite fair to accuse him without 
 any real proof of intolerable meanness, tyranny, 
 and imposition such as this would be. And if 
 you are not acquainted with any priests, and 
 have a general idea, such as unfortunately 
 thi9se of our Anglo-Saxon race, so called, are 
 rather apt to have, that foreigners are capable 
 of all sorts of villany, and that priests are most- 
 ly foreigners, or Irishmen at any rate, I would 
 suggest to you that not a few of them are, like 
 the writer of these pages, as much of what you 
 would call pure American descent and family 
 as you are yourself, and have perhaps been as 
 strong Protestants as you are now. 
 
 Then try to give up all this nonsense, handed 
 down to you from the dark ajges of ignorance 
 about the Catholic faith in which your- fathers 
 lived, and just listen to a little truth about it 
 from one who has had ideas like yours, but 
 now knows what he is talking about. 
 \^ Well, then, the fact is, that we believe that 
 
"4 
 
 Purgatory. 
 
 the Catholic who loves God and his neighbor is 
 saved, and that the Catholic who commits a 
 grievous sin, and dies without true repentance, 
 is damned. But we believe that Catholics who 
 are saved, and are sure therefore of heaven in 
 the end, do not necessarily enter on it immedi- 
 ately. For there are sins which are not griev- 
 ous or mortal. Such sins we call venial. I 
 hardly think you would seriously believe that a 
 boy who stole an apple from an orchard or from 
 a grocery store would be condemned to hell for 
 it ; on the other hand, you do believe that a 
 murderer or an adulterer dying impenitent 
 would, no matter if he did have faith in Christ. 
 For dying impenitent would mean that he did 
 not care about the oflFence to God in his murder 
 or adultery, and was ready to commit more if 
 it suited his convenience. This distinction be- 
 tween mortal and venial sins is then simply 
 common sense. Of course we cannot always 
 decide whether a sin is mortal or venial, but 
 that there is a difference between the two is 
 plain. 
 
 Now, it is on account of these venial sins that 
 we believe most of those who are saved do hot 
 enter heaven immediately. For though they 
 are venial or comparatively easy to be forgiven 
 (for that is what the word venial'* means), 
 still they are sins, and they defile the soul ; and 
 as we have seen; nothing defiled can enter 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 lis 
 
 heaveii. The .^oul with the taint of sin on it, 
 however slight, cannot see the face of God. It 
 must be purified first, and there is nothing like 
 suffering patiently borne to purify a soul. 
 This we cannot help seeing, even in this world. 
 
 Now, purgatory means a state- of purification 
 or purging from sin by suffering; it is, then, 
 entirely reasonable that the soul not as yet 
 thoroughly purified in this world should be in 
 purgatory for a time, till this purification is 
 accomplished. 
 
 But in order that this doctrine may be more 
 thoroughly understood, I must explain to you 
 the Catholic teaching about satisfaction for sin. 
 I shall begin a little way back, and come gradu- 
 ally to it. 
 
 Perhaps you imagine — I think most Protes- 
 tants do — that we Catholics believe that we can 
 atone or satisfy for sin simply by doing some 
 good works, such as almsgiving, or by punish- 
 ing ourselves for it, as by fasting or abstinence 
 from meat. I have, however, already told you 
 that this is not the case ; that we believe, just 
 as much as any Protestant does, that Christ's 
 Passion and Death is the only thing that can 
 satisfy for our sins. We have faith in Christ as 
 our Redeemer, and our sole Redeemer, just as 
 much as any Protestant has ; and what is more, 
 every Catholic that has an atom of the instiuc- 
 tiou which we endeavor to give to all, knows 
 
ii6 
 
 Purgatory. 
 
 and understands this fully from his childhood. 
 We do not, then, believe that we are saved by 
 our own good works, but by the merits of 
 Christ ; but we also believe that we cannot avail 
 ourselves of those merits of Christ unless we 
 have besides faith, also what St. Paul, and the 
 Church after him, call charity. 
 
 Now, what is this charity of which St. Paul 
 speaks, and of which he says most distinctly 
 that it is greater than even faith itself? Now 
 there remain,'* he says (i Cor. xiii. 13), faith, 
 hope, charity, these three ; but the greater of 
 these is charity." 
 
 It evidently is not almsgiving simply and by 
 itself, which is what we generally understand in 
 English by charity ; for he says in this chapter 
 (v. 3) : **If I should distribute all my goods to 
 feed the poor . • . and have not charity, it 
 profiteth me nothing.** 
 
 There is no real doubt about the meaning of 
 this word. The Latin word '^caritas,** from 
 which charity comes, means simply what we 
 may call for the moment dearness; that is to 
 say the virtue by which God and our neighbor 
 become dear to us ; or, in other words, the love 
 of God and of our neighbor, which is enjoined 
 on us by Christ Himself as the sum and sub- 
 stance pf the whole law. We read (Luke x. 
 27) that the young man in answer to Christ's 
 question, *'What is written in the law?" 
 
Purgatory. ^ \\J 
 
 answered, Thou shalt love the lyord thy God 
 with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, 
 and with all thy strength, and with all thy 
 mind, and thy neighbor as thyself*'; and we 
 read immediately afterward that Christ told him 
 he had answered right. 
 
 Faith, then, without charity, or the love of 
 God, from which the love of our neighbor 
 necessarily follows — for St. John says (I. iv. 
 20) : *'If any man say, I love God, and hateth 
 his brother, he is a liar'' — is, according to 
 the plain teaching of St. Paul as given above, 
 unprofitable, or insufficient for salvation. The 
 same doctrine is taught most clearly by St. 
 James (ii, 17) : So faith also, if it have not 
 works, is dead in itself " ; or as the Protestant 
 version has it, Even so faith, if it hath not 
 works, is dead, being alone." No wonder that 
 I^uther objected to this epistle of St. James, - 
 and called it an ''epistle of straw"; but St. 
 Paul, you see, teaches just the same thing. 
 St. James, however, develops it more fully 
 (ii. 14-26). 
 
 It is, then, most certain that faith alone will 
 not save us ; we must also have the love of God, 
 and this love of God, unless it show itself by 
 good works, is false. St. John says (I. iii. 
 16-18, and I quote your own version) : *' Here- 
 by perceive we the love of God, because he laid 
 down his life for us ; and we ought to lay down 
 
Ii8 Purgatory. 
 
 our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this 
 world's good, and seeth his brother have need, 
 and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from 
 him, how dwelleth the love of God in him ? My 
 little children, let us not love in word, neither 
 in tongue ; but in deed and in truth.*' 
 
 Now, the question arises: Are these good 
 works which must necessarily show themselves 
 in our lives, if we have the love of God in us 
 which is needed for salvation, of any use to us ? 
 Is the Christian who abounds in them any more 
 pleasing to God than he who has only a few? i 
 
 It would seem that there can be only one 
 answer to this. If our love for God pleases 
 Him, and is needed that we may see His face in 
 heaven, the more of it we have the more we 
 shall please Him ; and each good work that we 
 do under the influence of it will please Him; 
 and will obtain for itself a special reward. He 
 Himself teaches this most clearly: Whoso- 
 ever shall give to drink to one of these little 
 ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a 
 disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his 
 reward.** 
 
 After this, it hardly seems necessary to mul- 
 tiply texts. All our good works done with 
 faith and the love of God, are each and individ- 
 ually to receive a reward from Him ; and it is 
 perfectly well understood that our claim to this 
 reward rests primarily on the merits of Christ. 
 
Purgatory, 
 
 119 
 
 But now still another question comes, which is 
 the real one with which we are specially con- 
 cerned just now. And that is, do our good 
 works, besides receiving a reward in heaven, 
 and perhaps even also here, avail in any way to 
 undo the effect of our sins? Do they offer, in 
 other words, any satisfaction for them? 
 
 Of course it is plain from what I hav^ said 
 that they cannot thus avail, according to our 
 doctrine, in themselves, except so far as they 
 may incline God, and indeed do certainly 
 incline Him, to bring us to Christ by faith, so 
 that His Precious Blood, shed on the cross, 
 may wash our souls from original and actual 
 sin, and implant at the same time in our hearts 
 a supernatural love of Him, founded on thi^ 
 faith. Thus we read (Acts x. 30-32) * 'Corner 
 lius said : Four days ago, unto this hour, I 
 was praying in my house, at the ninth hour, and 
 behold a man stood before me in white apparel, 
 and said : * Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and 
 thy alms are had in remembrance, in the sight 
 of God. Send therefore to Joppa, and call 
 hither Simon, who is surnamed Peter.' And 
 Peter coming, instructed Cornelius in the Chris- 
 tian faith, and baptized him. 
 
 But do our good works afterward, when we 
 are united with Christ, help in any way^ or join 
 in with His in satisfying for our sin ? Now we 
 get at the real point* _ ^ 
 
I20 
 
 Purgatory. 
 
 I would ask you to turn to St. Paul's epistle 
 to the Colossians. In the first cliapter (v. 24 ) , 
 you will find, in your own Version, the Apostle 
 saying of himself : I, Paul, . . , who now 
 rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up 
 what is behind of the afiiictions of Christ in my 
 flesh for His body's sake, which is the Church.*' 
 
 Now, was not this great presumption for St. 
 Paul to undertake to fill up what was behind 
 (or wanting, as the more natural translation is) 
 of the afiiictions or sufferings of Christ ? I do 
 not see how any Bible Christianxan think so. 
 But does not it imply that Christ's redemption 
 was in some way inadequate ? No, not at all, 
 according to our doctrine on the subject. 
 
 And why not ? Because we hold that it is 
 Christ's merits and sufferings only which can 
 give any certain value to the works of St. Paul 
 or of any one else. It is Christ's Death and 
 Passion which runs through everything ; He re- 
 deems us from our sins. He pays the penalty of 
 them ; but He also sets the seal of His Passion 
 and Death on our little efforts, made in union 
 with Him, by His grace, and by souls which 
 believe in Him and accept His salvation. And 
 why not in the way of satisfying for sin, as well 
 as in that of obtaining an increased heavenly 
 reward ? * 
 
 You will say because Christ's redemption or 
 satisfaction was in itself so full and complete 
 
Purgatory, 
 
 that nothing more remains to be done in that 
 way. But if so, what is this that St. Paul 
 speaks of that is ' ' behind ' ' or wanting in it ? 
 
 It is just this. Christ's salvation is free, 
 yes ; to obtain that, we have only to accept it, 
 accompanying, of course, our acceptance with 
 true repentance, and love for Him who has 
 given it. But salvation is not all. If it were, 
 we should, when our sins are forgiven, be free 
 from even the natural consequences which they 
 have entailed. But it is evident that we are 
 not. The mental and bodily weakness, disease, 
 or suffering which comes from sin still remains, 
 as we know for a fact, unless it is removed by 
 some special miracle. We are often also amen- 
 able to the law ' of man for it ; and this law of 
 man is sanctioned by the law of God. All that 
 is absolutely promised us by salvation is that if 
 we persevere in the love of God, we shall ulti- 
 mately see Him and be with Him in heaven for 
 ever. But it does not follow that we may not 
 still have to suffer for our sins on the way. 
 That is clear from all human experience. 
 
 Now, what we Catholics hold is simply this : 
 that as a man may by natural means, by sub- 
 jecting himself, for instance, to a painful bodily 
 discipline or treatment, remove or avoid the 
 natural consequences which his sins have natu- 
 rally caused, so he may by supernatural means, 
 that is, by the merits of Christ still lying in store 
 
r**^ h:irgatory. 
 
 . y. . — _ 
 
 VAX him, avoid a remaining temporal penalty in 
 the supernatural order which is still due even 
 after eternal salvation has been given him. 
 This salvation, due to Christ's merits, has been 
 given him with but little trouble on his part ; it 
 has been brought, as it were, to his door. The 
 remainder is also waiting for him, but he has to 
 take some trouble to get it ; to travel a little 
 distance, as we may say ; to use some exertion. 
 He has to fill up, not what is absolutely wanting 
 in Christ's sufferings, but what is wanting to 
 him ; what he has not yet laid hold of ; and this 
 he has to do with some effort and some pain. 
 
 Now, this doctrine of a remaining temporal 
 penalty for sin is in complete accordance with 
 the idea of forgiveness ; it does not contradict it 
 in any way. A father forgives his son a fault, 
 but still he requires him to make some amends 
 for the fault ; it is better, even for the son's own 
 sake, that he should do so. 
 
 And it is also in accordance with what the 
 Bible tells us about God's own dealings. We 
 read in the Old Testament of King David 
 (II. Samuel xii. 13) : Nathan said to David : 
 The Lord also hath taken away thy sin ; thou 
 shalt not die. Nevertheless because thou hast 
 given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to 
 blaspheme, for this thing the child that is born 
 to thee shall surely die." 
 
 Again we read in the same book (chapter 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 123 
 
 xxiv.) that David offended God by pride in 
 numbering the people. He acknowledged and 
 bewailed his fault, but was punished for it, by a 
 plague cutting oflF seventy thousand of those he 
 had numbered. Afterward he was told to build 
 an altar to the Lord ; and he did so, and offered 
 on it holocausts and peace-offerings ; and (v. 25) 
 **The plague was stayed from Israel." Here 
 we have not only the temporal punishment ap- 
 pointed by God for sin, but also the removal of 
 it by the substitution in its place of prayers and 
 good works. 
 
 It is plain, then, is it not, that David by his 
 holocausts and offerings, satisfied for his sin as 
 far as this temporal penalty was concerned ? but 
 surely he had no advantage that we also have 
 not. He was forgiven his sin, and the temporal 
 penalty was remitted, just in the same way as it 
 is with us now ; both remissions were in view 
 not merely of David's acts, but of Christ*s 
 merits. The case then with David was just the 
 same as it is with us now. There is no differ- 
 ence between his time and ours, except that the 
 real expiation had not then been made ; but 
 there was only one real expiation for sin, then 
 as now ; and now, as well as then, our own 
 acts, poor and miserable as they are, can be, 
 and are, sanctified by this one great Sacrifice 
 which, in the fulness of time, God Himself 
 offered for us. 
 
124 Purgatory. 
 
 This, then, is what Catholics mean by satis- 
 faction. And notice, it must be made, it can 
 only be made, by a soul which has been for- 
 given, and which now loves God; notice also 
 that it has no efl&cacy whatever except so far as 
 it rests on the sacrifice of Christ. 
 
 Now, almost all Christians who have attained 
 adult years, even if thoroughly repentant for 
 sin, and in the love of God, probably owe a 
 considerable temporal penalty for their past sins. 
 They will have to suffer something for them 
 before they can see God's Face in heaven. 
 Something they could do to avert this — they 
 could substitute something for it, just as David 
 did; but do they? Not very much, as a rule, 
 beyond bearing with patience the sufferings of 
 this life which God may send them. These 
 sufferings, and their patience, no doubt count 
 for a good deal ; but it would appear that those 
 who have sinned a good deal do not have more 
 suffering, probably less on the whole than those 
 who have led good and holy lives. So it would 
 seem that satisfaction in their case is mostly 
 postponed till after death. 
 
 So purgatory is not only a state, as explained 
 in the beginning, of punishment for venial sin, 
 that is, for those lesser sins which do not make 
 us lose the love of God ; but also it is in purga- 
 tory that the temporal penalty due to mortal or 
 grievous sin, even when it is repented of, is 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 125 
 
 paid, unless satisfaction has been made for it in 
 this life. 
 
 And we believe that most Christians who die 
 in the love of God go to purgatory for a time, 
 for few repent or expiate their venial sins or 
 their mortal ones as they should, in this life; 
 but we do not believe that any one, however 
 firmly he may hold the Catholic faith, goes to 
 purgatory if he dies unrepentant of mortal sin. 
 No, such an one is lost for ever ; there is no 
 purgatory for him. 
 
 But of course we do not know, individually, 
 who goes there and who does not. Those who 
 seem the holiest and fit for heaven at once, may 
 still in the sight of God need further purifying 
 and further satisfaction ; and those who seem to 
 die unrepentant may really turn to God at the 
 last. So we presume all Catholics who die to 
 be in purgatory; though it may often seem 
 more probable for a particular soul that it is in 
 heaven or in hell. 
 
 Now, is there anything that we believe can be 
 done for them, if they are in purgatory ? Cer- 
 tainly, if we admit that there is a purgatory, 
 there seems to be no reason why we may not 
 pray for the souls there in general, or for any 
 particular soul which may be there ; for we may 
 always pray for anything which may be pleas- 
 ing to God, and we know that the deliverance 
 of a soul from purgatory is pleasing to God, fol 
 
126 Purgatory. 
 
 it is a thing which He certainly intends to ac- 
 complish. And charity also must induce us to 
 pray, especially for those souls most near and 
 dear to us. 
 
 Furthermore, St. Paul tells us (Col. v. 24, as 
 quoted) that he fills up * * what is behind of the 
 sufferings of Christ . . . for His body's 
 sake, which is the Church.'* St. Paul, then, 
 suffered for the Church; for his brethren in 
 Christ, as well as on account of any sins of his 
 own. We hold then, in accordance with his 
 teaching, that we may also do something in this 
 way ; offering up our own sufferings, either un- 
 avoidable or voluntary, for our suffering 
 brethren. 
 
 Also David offered, as we have seen, sacri- 
 fices for his sins to satisfy for their temporal 
 punishment; and his sacrifices were accepted. 
 Now, if David's sacrifices, which were but the 
 shadow or presage of the true sacrifice of 
 Christ, were accepted, have we not something 
 more acceptable now ; namely, the offering of 
 that one true Sacr See, in the form of bread and 
 wine, under which the true lyamb of God once 
 slain is truly present, though concealed? 
 Even if one does not grant what we believe 
 about the Mass, certainly it is not inferior to 
 David's holocausts. Why then, following 
 David and St. Paul, should we not offier Mass 
 for the souls of the dead? 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 127 
 
 This, then, is what priests do; but they do 
 not extort money from the faithful for this pur- 
 pose. If any one wishes a Mass for their 
 deceased friends, it is no more than right that 
 they should contribute according to their meanb 
 to the priest's support ; for, as a priest simply, 
 he has no other means of support. The usual 
 offering in this country is one dollar ; certainly 
 a priest cannot become very wealthy on that, as 
 he can say Mass but once a day. But priests 
 are very careful not to force people to pay 
 money, or to insist on it except where it is due 
 for expenses which have to be incurred for the 
 people's sake, such as those for churches or 
 schools. Priests are not millionaires ; they 
 simply cannot provide these things, where the 
 Church is not supported by the state, unless 
 the people pay for them. 
 
 Now, I think we have pretty well gone over 
 this doctrine of purgatory, and of the Catholic 
 practice with regard to it. But you may proba- 
 bly ask what evidence we have that there is 
 any purgatory ; why do we make it a part of our 
 faith? 
 
 To this I would answer that we make it a 
 matter of faith because, if it is clear with re- 
 gard to any doctrine that it always has been 
 believed in the Church, it is with regard to this. 
 Faith expresses itself in practice ; and we find 
 the practice of praying for the dead reaching 
 
128 
 
 Purgatory. 
 
 not only into the early ages of Christianity, but 
 even into those of the Old Testament. As a 
 matter of history, at least, this is made clear 
 from the second book of the Machabees, in 
 which we read of Judas Machabeus that, 
 ''making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand 
 drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to 
 be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking 
 well and religiously concerning the resurrec- 
 tion. (For if he had not hoped that they that 
 were slain should rise again, it would have 
 seamed superfluous and vain to pray for the 
 dead;) and because he considered that they 
 who had fallen asleep with godliness, had gre^t 
 grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy 
 and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, 
 that they may be loosed from sins.'* 
 
 I say as a matter of history, at least; for 
 though Protestants do not regard the books of 
 the Machabees as inspired, they cannot denj^ 
 that these books were read reverently by the 
 Jews, and no protest made against this doctrine 
 by those who believed in the resurrection. It 
 may be added that the Jews at the present day 
 pray for the dead, as their fathers did before them. 
 
 And we do not find that any protest was 
 made against prayers for the dead till the 
 peculiar Protestant doctrine of justification by 
 faith alone was introduced at the time of the 
 Reformation. This doctrine, of course, shuts 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 129 
 
 out the idea of such prayers, for it requires no 
 real purity of soul as a condition for entrance 
 into heaven ; it only requires that its unclean- 
 ness should be covered by the mantle of Christ's 
 righteousness accepted by faith ; and hence, of 
 course, according to it, there is no difference in 
 fitness for heaven between the soul of the most 
 perfect follower of Christ and that of a life-long 
 sinner, if only both have accepted Him as their 
 Saviour. 
 
 But we have quite an explicit teaching or ex- 
 planation of the doctrine of purgatory in the 
 writings of St. Paul in the New Testament* 
 It is very hard to conceive any other meaning 
 for the passage. It is found in the first epistle 
 of the Apostle to the Corinthians, iii. 11-15; 
 and is as follows: **For other foundation no 
 man can lay, but that which is laid ; v/hich 
 is Christ Jksus. Now, if any man build 
 upon this foundation gold, silver, precious 
 stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work 
 shall be manifest ; for the day of the Lord 
 shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in 
 fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, 
 of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, 
 which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive 
 a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall 
 suffer loss ; but he himself shall be saved, yet 
 so as by fire." 
 
 This passage seems to plainly teach that the 
 
Purgatory, 
 
 works of Christians differ in their acceptable- 
 ness with God ; that their good works, done to 
 please God, shall not be touched by this fire, 
 but their works which are more or less spoiled 
 by sin must be purified if not altogether con- 
 sumed by it, the soul of the sinner nevertheless 
 being saved. What is this fire which burns 
 some works of Christians, but not others, the 
 soul still being saved, if not that of purgatory? 
 
 But do not for a moment imagine that the 
 Church teaches, or that any Catholic imagines, 
 that unrepented mortal sin can be burnt out in 
 this way. By no means ; as has been said,, 
 there is no salvation for any one dying with 
 such sin on his head. 
 
 As to the suffering in purgatory, the Church 
 has never defined precisely what it is ; and it is 
 probable that in this life we cannot fully under- 
 stand it. The soul in purgatory is separated 
 from the body by death, and not yet reunited 
 with it by the resurrection, so that bodily pains, 
 as we understand them, seem impossible. 
 Nevertheless, all suffering really is in the soul ; 
 and it is possible that the disembodied soul 
 may suffer pains similar to that which in this 
 life come to it through the body. But the prin- 
 cipal suffering would seem to be that which 
 comes from the temporary separation of the soul 
 from God, whom it desires and longs to be 
 united with most ardently. 
 
Purgatory. 
 
 Instinctively, I think, almost every one 
 recognizes or wishes to recognize the truth of 
 the Catholic faith iii this respect. Of course 
 when one dear to us dies in the faith of Christ 
 after a saintly, or even an ordinarily good life, 
 there is not much difficulty in representing 
 them to ourselves as being now in heaven ; but 
 when the life of such an one has been quite 
 worldly and imperfect, we all feel that he is 
 hardly fit for heaven, and yet we cannot bring 
 ourselves really to believe that his portion is 
 with the lost. We feel that God will yet be 
 merciful to him, and admit him to the heaven 
 for which he has hoped, and to which, though 
 weakly and imperfectly, and with many falls by 
 the way, he has endeavored to direct his steps. 
 And we want, if we love such an one, to do 
 something to help him, and to hasten the hour 
 of his arrival at that eternal home. And even 
 though we may have been taught that 'prayers 
 for the dead are useless, they will rise unbidden 
 to our lips. It is human nature's tribute to the 
 Catholic teaching, which is also that of the 
 , Greek Church, and of all the churches of the 
 East as well ; and is not only consoling to our 
 feelings and hopes, but also in accordance witli 
 reason and common sense. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE RKSURRKCTION OF THK DKAD ; KVKRI.AST- 
 ING I.IFK. 
 
 A and believed by Catholics, is a temporary 
 state ; with regard to its duration in any par- 
 ticular case, of course we can know nothing, 
 unless by some special revelation. However, it 
 is evident that it cannot extend after what is 
 commonly known as the day of judgment. 
 
 With regard to this day of judgment it is a 
 matter of faith that there will be such a day, in 
 which all mankind will be judged together, and 
 the place or state of every human being de- 
 finitely assigned for all eternity. No doctrine 
 is more plainly taught in Holy Scripture than 
 this. 
 
 We have in the book of Daniel (xii. 2) the 
 following words: *'And many of those that 
 sleep in the dust of the earth, shall awake: 
 some unto life everlasting, and others unto re- 
 proach, to see it always." 
 
 From this, as it stands in English, we should 
 plainly gathef that only some of the dead were 
 to arise to judgment ; and it is a good instance of 
 the impossibility of arriving at certain con- 
 
 purgatory, as understood 
 
The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 133 
 
 elusions of faith by simply taking the translated 
 Bible as we have it in our vernacular, and the 
 futility of attempting to do so. Taking this as 
 we should naturally understand it, it is in con- 
 tradiction to the words of our Lord himself 
 (John V. 28-29): Wonder not at this, for the 
 hour cometh, wherein all that are in the graves 
 shall hear the voice of the Son of God. And 
 they that have done good things, shall come 
 forth unto the resurrection of life ; but they that 
 have done evil, unto the resurrection of judg- 
 ment.'' For you notice that Daniel says, 
 
 many of those,'' whereas Christ says all." 
 
 It is plain that unless Daniel is to contradict 
 our lyord Himself, we must understand by the 
 words *'many" in his text, that the number 
 will be great ; and we must look at the idiom 
 of the language in which his words were ori- 
 ginally written. Hence the need of some in- 
 terpreters of the Bible must, it seems to me, be 
 quite clear, unless every Christian is expect- 
 ed to be a learned man and a profound stu- 
 dent. 
 
 We also find in St. Matthew's gospel (xxv. 
 31-46) a very explicit and full description of 
 the day of judgment, given by Christ Himself: 
 
 And when the Son of Man shall come in His 
 Majesty, and all the angels with Him, then 
 shall He sit upon the seat of His Majesty ; and 
 all nations shall be gathered together before 
 
134 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 
 
 Him, and He shall separate them one from ano- 
 ther, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from 
 the goats*' (verses 31, 32). 
 
 St. Peter is very full also in his description of 
 the day of judgment ; telling us distinctly that 
 the world shall at that time be destroyed by 
 fire. He says (I. Pet. iii. 10): **The day of 
 the lyord shall come as a thief, in which the 
 heavens shall pass away with great violence, 
 and the elements shall be melted with heat, and 
 the earth and the works which are in it shall be 
 burnt up.'* 
 
 Science, I need hardly say, cannot contradict 
 this prophecy ; for no one who believes in God 
 can deny His power to dispose of what He has 
 made, by special exertions of His power ; but 
 it may be added that such a destruction of the 
 earth may easily come from causes now in 
 operation. To produce such an effect, a col- 
 lision of some large external body with the 
 earth or the sun, or even a serious derangement 
 of the orbit of the earth by the influence of such 
 a body, would be amply sufficient. 
 
 The doctrine of the general judgment is 
 taught clearly in other parts of Scripture, but it 
 Is hardly necessary to dwell longer on the mat- 
 ter. It is generally accepted by Christians who 
 believe in revelation, and is embodied in what 
 Is called the Apostles' Creed, which Christians 
 generally recite. * * From thence ' ' (that is, from 
 
The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 135 
 
 heaven) **he shall come to judge the living 
 and the dead/* are the words of this creed. 
 
 We are told, as has been seen, that at the 
 gem pi judgment our bodies shall rise from the 
 graves in which they have been laid. But how 
 about those which have not been buried ; those 
 which have been cremated, torn and devoured 
 by wild beasts or cannibals? 
 
 To this it may be answered that it is not nec- 
 essary that all the particles actually composing 
 a human body at the time of death should be 
 reassembled in the body which shall rise at the 
 last day. This would require a special and 
 miraculous Divine interposition in some cases, 
 as in that of a cannibal dying shortly after he 
 had thoroughly assimilated some portions of 
 another human body with his own ; to avoid 
 the difficulty, it would be necessary that his 
 life should be specially preserved against the 
 attacks of his enemies until these portions had 
 departed from his body, or that they should be 
 prevented from assimilation, or removed in 
 some miraculous way. 
 
 Also in the case of a good and holy person 
 dying, as may n^ell be the case, with a body 
 wasted or corrupted by some loathsome and 
 disfiguring disease ; it surely would not be that 
 spoiled body with which that person would rise, 
 and could hardly be a new one made from the 
 Identical particles of which that was composed. 
 
1 36 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 
 
 And indeed the Church teaches that the 
 glorified bodies of the saints shall not have 
 disfiguring and inglorious marks like these, 
 and that limbs or members which the^v have 
 lost shall be restored in heaven ; for our lyord 
 can hardly have meant in saying, as we find 
 His words recorded in Mark ix. 42, that we 
 should actually enter '*into life, maimed," or 
 (v. 44), **lame, into life everlasting,*' but 
 rather that we should lose our hands and feet in 
 this life rather than forfeit the life to come ; for 
 perfect happiness would be inconsistent with 
 these blemishes and inconveniences. Compare 
 also Matt. v. 29, 30, where the same lesson is 
 taught in different words. These defects must 
 then be made up from material not belonging to 
 the body at the time of death ; and there seems 
 to be no reason at all why this material should 
 at any time of life have belonged to that body, 
 and been separated from it in the constant 
 changes which our bodies undergo in this life. 
 
 The fact is that a precise restoration of all the 
 particles belonging to a body is not necessary to 
 constitute identity. When the change goes on 
 gradually we call a body the same though all 
 its particles may be replaced in course of time 
 by others, as in the case of our bodies during 
 life. And a considerable change may even be 
 suddenly made without affecting identity. No 
 one would dream that our bodies lost identity 
 
The Resurrection. ; Everlasting Life. 1 37 
 
 by having a tooth pulled, or a new piece of skin 
 grafted on in place of what had been destroyed. 
 
 We must conclude, then, simply that at the 
 resurrec^on the body will be what we should 
 call th^ 'Same as that which we have now, but 
 not that every individual particle or chemical 
 atom of the elements of which it is composed, 
 no more and no less, shall be used in its recon- 
 struction. 
 
 From what has been said and the texts which 
 have been quoted, it is plain that there will be 
 two distinct classes of those who rise at the last 
 day. Some rise, as Daniel tells us, to life ever- 
 lasting, the others to reproach ; or as our Lord 
 tells us more distinctly, they that have done 
 good, to the resurrection of life ; they that have 
 done evil, to that of judgment; that is, for the 
 former sin and death are blotted out and 
 destroyed for ever ; whereas in the latter sin 
 remains, to be judged according to its deserts, 
 the merits of the death of Christ not having 
 been applied to atone for it. 
 
 It is not, however, that Christ did not shed 
 His blood for all ; the Church teaches that He 
 did. But some have refused to avail themselves 
 of His sacrifice, by not repenting and turning 
 from sin, and believing and trusting in their 
 Saviour, so far as He has been made known to 
 them. 
 
 It is impossible for us to decide what on the 
 
138 The Resurrection ; . Everlasting Life. 
 
 whole will be the resurrection or future state of 
 those who have had no opportunity of knowing 
 anything about Christ and the redemption 
 which He has offered. But we do know that 
 salvation was possible before this reeiemption 
 was actually accomplished, or the way of it dis- 
 tinctly made known ; and it seems certainly 
 impossible that the state of a man could be 
 changed by the actual accomplishment of the 
 great sacrifice of the Cross, if the conditions 
 under which he was living were such that he 
 could not possibly hear of it, or that in fact he 
 had not the slightest information with regard to 
 it. Therefore it seems certain that by means 
 of the death of Christ all men in all ages have 
 had, and that all now living have, the means 
 of salvation, if they make the best use of the 
 light and the grace from God which is given to 
 them. And indeed St. Thomas Aquinas, than 
 whom there is no higher human authority in 
 the Church, tells us that God would send an 
 angel specially to instruct one who could not 
 obtain what instruction was necessary in any 
 other way. 
 
 So we need not inquire further into this 
 matter ; it is our duty to bring the light of the 
 gospel to those who do not have it, to instruct 
 them in the Christian faith, and persuade them 
 to embrace it ; especially as without the strength 
 which it gives it is extremely hard even to keep 
 
The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 139 
 
 the law which is manifest to all, as St. Paul 
 says (Rom. i. 19-20). But we should not pass 
 absolute judgment on any one, and especially 
 not on those to whom the gospel has not been 
 preached. St. Paul says (I. Cor. v. 12, 13) : 
 ''What have I to do to judge them that are 
 without ? . . . For them that are without, 
 God will judge.*' 
 
 Those, then, who by faith of some kind, 
 and by a life corresponding to it, have pleased 
 God, shall be saved. But let it not be im- 
 agined that a man can, therefore, simply rest 
 content with the knowledge that he has, or 
 that with which others are seemingly satisfied. 
 It is the duty of every one to know God's will 
 and God's truth according to the means offered 
 to him; not to rest till he has attained what 
 knowledge is attainable by him on this, the 
 most important of all matters. And having 
 attained it, he must regulate his life according 
 to it ; not transgressing the known law, or im- 
 pugning the known truth ; or if he have done 
 so, repenting with his whole heart. One mortal 
 sin, one grievous departure from what con- 
 science dictates, takes away the life of the soul 
 in God, and brings upon it eternal condemna- 
 tion. And carelessness or indifference as to 
 what God wills us to believe or to do has mani- 
 festly the same effect. 
 
 lyCt it not, then, be imagined that we can 
 
I40 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 
 
 adopt the shallow and deceitful maxim, that it 
 makes no diflference what a man believes, as 
 long as his life is right. ^ For how can a man's 
 life be right if he sins against God by disbelief 
 in what He teaches or reveals, or indifference 
 as to whether He does actually teach or 
 reveal a particular truth, whether that truth 
 concern faith or morals? This maxim simply 
 takes for granted that every one naturally and 
 without effort knows everything about his 
 duty; that every one, no matter what his 
 education or surroundings, knows what it has 
 puzzled the greatest human intellects, un- 
 p^sisted by revelation, to discover. 
 ^ But to resume our proper st bject. Those 
 who are saved or lost are, according to the faith 
 of the Church, saved or lost both body and 
 soul at the general resurrection. To the for- 
 mer are given bodies not only perfect and in- 
 cort'uptible, but also endowed with other pro- 
 perties not naturally belonging to material 
 substances; the faculty of passing over great 
 distances with ease and quickness, and of pass- 
 ing unobstructed through material obstacles ; 
 as was the case with the risen body of Christ, 
 which, as we read (John xx. 19), presented 
 itself to his disciples though the doors were 
 shut. Also the bodies of the saved shall be 
 insensible to pain, and of course not liable to 
 disease. or weariness; and shall be perpetually 
 
The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 141 
 
 young and strong, and receive nothing' but 
 comfort and enjoyment from any circumstances 
 in which they may be placed. > 
 
 As to those of the lost, the direct opposite is 
 held. The results and consequences of sin re- 
 • main in them ; they are incorruptible anci in- 
 destructible, but otherwise they have no super- 
 natural qualities. They are sensible to pain, 
 and undoubtedly suffer it ; just what this pain 
 is, has never been precisely defined ; the com- 
 mon opinion has always been that it was to a 
 great extent actual fire, as our I^ord Himself 
 uses this word in describing it. 
 
 Now another question remains to be con- 
 sidered. What is the state of the souls of the 
 lost, from the time of death, and of that of the 
 saved from the time of their deliverance from 
 purgatory — if that purification has been nec- 
 essary for them — to the time of the resurrection ? 
 
 The teaching of the Church on this point is 
 that heaven begins for the saved, and hell for 
 the lost, before the resurrection ; though in a 
 limited and incomplete sense ; and yet in the 
 most important respect, for the principal happi- 
 ness of heaven is in the union of the soul with 
 God, and in its enjoyment of Him by what is 
 called the beatific vision, whereas the principal 
 misery of hell is in the eternal separation of 
 the soul from God, which is then most keenly 
 felt, the vanity and insufficiency of th«i false 
 
142 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 
 
 pleasures sought during life being then plainly 
 seen. And as it is, after all, in the soul that 
 all real pain or happiness is felt, there is nc 
 reason why there should not be in heaven be* 
 fore the resurrection something equivalent tci 
 bodily enjoyment, or in hell, as in purgatory, 
 to bodily pain. 
 
 The soul, then, is believed to pass to what is 
 called the particular judgment (that is, the 
 judgment for each one in particular) , immedi- 
 ately after death ; and its eternal state is then de- 
 termined, according as it has left this world in 
 union with, or separation from God. Most of 
 those on whom a favorable sentence is pro- 
 nounced, we have reason to believe, remain a 
 while in purgatory before they are fit to enter on 
 the joys of heaven ; and they themselves, recog- 
 nizing their unfitness, would desire nothing else. 
 The rest go immediately to their permanent 
 state, only to be changed at the last day by the 
 resurrection and resumption of the body, which 
 shares in the punishment of sin, as it has shared 
 in the sin itself. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 THK PRIMACY OF THK ROMAN PONTIFF. 
 
 THE next article of the profession of faith 
 which we are discussing concerns * ' the 
 primacy, not only of honor, but also of juris- 
 diction, of the Roman Pontiff.'* It is hardly 
 necessary to say that by the Roman Pontiff is 
 meant the Pope. That we regard him as the 
 successor of St. Peter, and St. Peter as the 
 Prince or head of the apostles, has already been 
 stated. By his being the Vicar of Jesus Christ 
 we mean that he is the representative of Christ 
 as the head of the Church, and under Christ, 
 its visible head and ruler. v ' 
 
 Now, what is meant by the primacy, not only 
 of honor ^ but also of jurisdidioyi^ of the Pope? 
 
 Primacy means the first or most distinguished 
 place. By a primacy of honor would be meant 
 the being entitled above others to certain out- 
 ward signs of respect, the having what is called 
 the precedence over others in public assemblies, 
 processions, and the like. Thus in England, 
 for example, the Prince of Wales has a primacy 
 of honor, next after the Queen ; after her, the 
 greatest outward respect would be shown to 
 him. But he has, as long as he remains merely 
 143 
 
144 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff, 
 
 Prince of Wales, no jurisdiction whatever in 
 the kingdom. He does not sit in Parliament, 
 and has no voice in the making of the laws; 
 and his approval of them is not required. 
 
 By jurisdiction is meant just this, the power 
 of making laws, or in some way governing 
 others legally. So in this respect, you see, a 
 member of the House of Commons in England 
 has jurisdiction, which the Prince of Wales has 
 not. The primacy of jurisdiction would belong 
 to him who had the greatest power of law- 
 making or of government. 
 
 When we say, then, that in the Catholic 
 Church the Pope has not only the primacy 
 of honor, but also of jurisdiction, we mean that 
 not only is the Pope entitled to the greatest out- 
 ward marks of respect, that to him, for ex- 
 ample, would belong by right the first place of 
 honor in all assemblies or councils of bishops 
 and prelates, but also that he has a higher gov- 
 erning power in the Church than any of them. 
 
 In fact the Catholic ^doctrine is that the Pope 
 has supreme jurisdiction in the Church; that 
 there is no jurisdiction or government in it 
 which is not liable to control by him. He has 
 the power of making laws .for the whole 
 Church, or of repealing laws which have been 
 made ; being however, of course, limited in 
 this, like other legislators, by the condition that 
 his laws must be useful, just, and reasonable, 
 
The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 145 
 
 and not in conflict with the divine law. In 
 case of doubt on any of those points, however, 
 the presumption, as with other legislators, is in 
 his favor. 
 
 Bishops have, however, a similar law-making 
 power in their own dioceses, and their laws do 
 not require the Pope's approval that^ they may 
 go into effect ; but the Pope has the right and 
 the power to modify or change the laws of 
 bishops, and to oversee and control their action 
 as he may deem expedient. As a rule, how- 
 ever, he does not exercise this power or inter- 
 fere with their legislation. 
 
 It would be beyond the scope of a work like 
 the present one to bring up the proofs that the 
 Pope is really entitled to this supreme jurisdic- 
 tion. Whole books have been written on the 
 subject, and can be consulted by any one so 
 inclined. The principal texts of Holy Scrip- 
 ture on which this doctrine is based have been 
 given in the chapter on the infallibility of the 
 Pope ; I would merely remark here that there 
 seems to be no reason why our Lord, after twice 
 saying, feed my lambs,'' should say the third 
 time, **feed my sheep,'* unless the word 
 
 sheep" meant something different from the 
 word lambs." The sheep are understood by 
 Catholics to be the prelates of the Church, the 
 lambs the laity. 
 
 But the principal argument in its favor is to 
 
146 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 be derived from the actual history of the 
 Church, and from the impossibility of such an 
 enormous usurpation of power as this would be, 
 without the force of arms to carry it out. 
 
 The supreme power of the Pope is also in ac- 
 cordance with the requirements of common 
 sense. For the Church, to maintain its posi- 
 tion in the world, and to discharge eflfectively 
 the office committed to it by Christ, must neces- 
 sarily have some general government ; and that 
 government cannot well be by means of a con- 
 gress or parliament, on account of the difficulty 
 of calling such a body together in an institu- 
 tion which is world-wide ; the monarchical form 
 seems then necessary for it ; and the dangers of 
 the extraordinary powers residing in its head 
 are well compensated, to say nothing of the 
 special divine supervision by Christ the in- 
 visible head of the Church, by the weakness 
 of its visible head the Pope, as far as the arms 
 of this world are concerned. 
 
 But now an important point must be con- 
 sidered; and it is this. The sphere of the 
 Papal government is spiritual, not temporal. 
 The Pope, as such, has no right to command in 
 matters which simply concern the temporal well- 
 being of men in general, or even of Catholics 
 in particular ; in other words, he has no power 
 to make laws on those subjects with which the 
 State is legitimately concerned. On the con- 
 
The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 1 47 
 
 trary, his whole influence, and that of the 
 Church in general, is rightfully used, and as a 
 matter of fact has always been used, to incul- 
 cate obedience to existing governments, even 
 though their strict right to govern might be 
 questioned. It has always maintained the doc- 
 trine taught by St. Paul (Rom. xiii. 1-2) : 
 **Iyet every soul be subject to higher powers; 
 for there is no power but from God : and those 
 that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he 
 that rcvsisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance 
 of God. And they that resist, purchase to 
 themselves damnation . ' * 
 
 It is perfectly clear to any one who will read 
 history that disobedience to the laws of the 
 State has been always regarded by the Church 
 as sinful, as long as the State keeps within its 
 legitimate province. But if the State arrogates 
 'to itself powers which belong to the direct gov- 
 ernment of God over the individual soul, or to 
 the province of the Church itself as the guide 
 of its members in spiritual affairs, such an 
 usurpation the Church cannot sanction. The 
 State cannot lawfully copmand us to blaspheme 
 the name of God, or to commit adultery; 
 neither can it command us to deny the Chris- 
 tian faith, as the emperors of heathen Rome 
 and other persecutors have endeavored to do. 
 Nor can the State make laws directing the con- 
 sciences of Catholics in the matter of a diviiie 
 
148 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 institution like marriage, which has a spiritual 
 as well as a temporal aspect, except so far as 
 the merely temporal part, such as the inheri- 
 tance of property, is concerned. 
 
 This was the basis, for example, of the resist- 
 ance of Catholics to the attempts of the English 
 sovereigns, specially of Henry VIII., Elizabeth, 
 and James I., to enforce the oath of allegiance 
 to the sovereign as head of the Church as well 
 as of the State. This Catholics knew to be an 
 intrusion, an usurpation of power; and they 
 suffered heavy penalties, and often a most horri- 
 ble form of death, rather than submit to it. I 
 shall have more to say of this matter of persecu- 
 tion later on. For the present it may merely be 
 remarked that what may be called persecution 
 on the part of the State, of openly expressed 
 opinions and of practices which are contrary to 
 its well-being in the temporal order, are obvi- 
 ously sometimes necessary, as in the cases of 
 anarchists and polygamists ; though the victims 
 may complain that their consciences are tram- 
 pled on, and if they really believe that their 
 consciences speak to them in the name of God, 
 may be properly called martyrs to what appQ^rs 
 to them to be the truth. 
 
 The relations of the Pope and of the Catholic 
 Church to the State, or in other words, to the 
 political government of the country, are a matter 
 most important to understand, and one which 
 
The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 149 
 
 has always occupied a foremost place in the 
 minds of Englishmen and Americans. It is not 
 too much to say that the real reason of the suc- 
 cess of the Reformation in England was not so 
 much any attachment to its doctrines on the 
 part of Englishmen, as a fear and jealousy of 
 Papal interference in the government of the 
 country. And it is the same here. We hear 
 continually that the Catholics care more for the 
 Pope than for America, that the priests manage 
 and control their vote in the interests of the 
 Church, and other stuff of this kind, which 
 would be simply amusing to us from the ab- 
 surdity of many forms in which the idea is ex- 
 pressed, did we not know that, strange and 
 ludicrous as it seems to us, it is considered 
 quite a serious matter by our fellow-country- 
 men. If they only knew a little, or would make 
 themselves a little acquainted with the way 
 things really work, they would see that priests 
 do not and cannot direct th-e Catholic people 
 politically, except where some moral question is 
 involved in which the voice of the Catholic 
 Church may be quite clear, as, for example, the 
 matter of temperance, or of the laws of mar- 
 riage ; and they would notice if they would 
 follow the priest in his daily life in his house 
 and in the church, that politics played much 
 less of ,a part in it than in that of the Protestant 
 minister, especially in these latter days; that 
 
1 50 The Primacy of the Roman Pontifi. 
 
 he does not preach about politics, talk about it 
 on the streets or in the homes of his people, or 
 bring it up in the confessional. To do so 
 would simply weaken his influence on the 
 people for good, and they would in fact be 
 scandalized at a priest's devoting much time 
 even to talking about it, and still more if he 
 should be a political worker. Of course there 
 are such cases, and the Catholic people do not 
 admire them. 
 
 And if Protestancs would inquire a little, they 
 would also find that priests who do take interest 
 in politics are on both sides, both Democrat and 
 Republican ; that they sometimes get into quite 
 animated discussion among themselves about 
 political matters ; and that the same is the case 
 with the Catholic people. The priests may 
 have political opinions, of course, like any 
 other American citizens, but they cannot force 
 them on the people for the very simple reason 
 that they disagree with each other, and cannot 
 speak in the name of the Church about these 
 matters because the Church does not tell them 
 what to say. 
 
 But in connection with this general subject 
 there is one special point deserving of a more 
 extended discussion ; one which has excited a 
 good deal of interest, and never more than at 
 present, in the minds of Americans ; and that is 
 the position the Catholic Church takes with 
 
Catholic Education, 
 
 151 
 
 regard to education, which seems to many 
 Protestants unpatriotic (if they do not call it by 
 some worse name) and full of danger for the 
 future of the country. As this matter comes 
 right in our line at present, I will devote a 
 chapter to it, though it has no very direct rela 
 tion to the substance of the profession of faith 
 which we are occupied in considering. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 CATHOI.IC KDUCATION. 
 
 S we enter on this subject, I shall firsiC 
 
 Ti. endeavor to dislodge from your minds a 
 strange idea which seems to have settled quite 
 firmly in those of many American Protestants ; 
 that is, that the main point Catholics are 
 anxious about in educational matters is the 
 driving of the Bible out of the schools. Our 
 Protestant friends start with the assumption 
 that we detest the Bible, and do not want our 
 people to read it or even hear of it. They 
 believe that Martin Luther dragged it from 
 the obscurity to which it had been consigned 
 for centuries, and that one of the principal 
 efforts of the Church has been ever since then 
 to get it back, at least as far as Catholics are 
 concerned, into that obscurity. 
 
152 - Catholic Education. 
 
 In fact, the effort of the Church has always 
 been the other way ; that is, to induce her 
 children to read the Bible. It was, of course, 
 rather difl&cult to do much at this before the 
 invention of printing ; Bibles, though com- 
 moner than other books, were rare enough, 
 necessarily. But when printing was invented 
 Bibles were immediately printed, and Catholics 
 were encouraged to read them. It is strange 
 how hard it is to get solid, hard, historical 
 facts into the heads of those whose previous 
 ideas do not fit in with them, and how the most 
 absurd legends are accepted in their place. As 
 to the facts, I quote fron^ Dr. Maitland's Dark 
 Ages the following, which may be more con- 
 vincing, as the author was a distinguished 
 Protestant clergyman, librarian to the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, and a Fellow of the 
 Royal Society. He says: *'To say nothing 
 of parts of the Bible, or of books whose place is 
 uncertain, we know of at least twenty different 
 editions of the whole I^atin Bible printed in 
 Germany only before lyUther was born.** 
 Again, Seckendorf, the biographer and admirer 
 of lyUther, confesses in his Commentaries 07t 
 Lutheranism that three distinct editions of 
 the Bible translated i7ito German were pub- 
 lished at Wittenberg in 1470, 1483, and 1490. 
 Now lyUther was born in 1483. In all, about 
 j^z/^«/>/- editions of the Bible, translated into the 
 
Catholic Edtuation. 
 
 153 
 
 vernacular tongues of Europe, were published 
 before lyUther had got out one copy of his Ger- 
 man Bible. 
 
 The Bible that Luther found, and which it is 
 supposed was such a great discovery, was a 
 Latin one ; it will be seen from what has just 
 been said what nonsense it is to suppose that he 
 found it by a rare chance, and rescued it from 
 obscurity. And yet he had the audacity to say, 
 in his Table Talk, that he was twenty years 
 old before he saw the Scriptures. This, no 
 doubt, may impose and has imposed on many ; 
 but to those in possession- of the facts it must 
 be evident either that he was singularly ignor- 
 ant or indiflferent in his early life about the 
 Holy Scriptures, or that when he made the 
 above statement he was simply telling a lie. 
 
 I said above that the desire and effort of the 
 Church is, and always has been, that 'jatholics 
 should read the Bible. But she desires that 
 they should read it reverently, not twisting it 
 to support their own fancies, but understand- 
 ing its more difficult passages as they have 
 been understood by learned and enlightened 
 Christian commentators. Catholics, however, 
 have never been so anxious to read it as the 
 Church has been that they should do so ; and 
 indeed the reason is not far to seek. For they 
 know that no passage of the Bible is contrary 
 to their faith, or can teach them anything 
 
^54 Catholic Education. 
 
 . ■■ 
 
 absolutely new or startling in the matter of re- 
 ligion, when it is rightly understood ; so it 
 becomes to them a book of what we call 
 spiritual reading, very excellent no doubt, but 
 in most of its parts differing principally from 
 other spiritual books (of which we have, by 
 the way, probably a hundred to every one pos- 
 sessed by Protestants) in its being absolutely 
 authoritative and inspired, whereas the others 
 are only practically sure to be free from error. 
 In other spiritual books the truths of the Bible 
 are presented more fully and in a more modem 
 and familiar style, so that we can hardly won- 
 der that they are, as a rule, preferred ; and that 
 though good Catholic families generally have a 
 Bible, it is more venerated than read. But 
 none have any principle against reading the 
 Bible ; and all know that their pastors would 
 like them to read it. 
 
 But why then, you will ask, did they, and 
 the priests too, object to reading the Bible in 
 the schools ? This is not a difficult question to 
 answer. One reason was that the Bible used 
 was the Protestant Bible, to which we have 
 objections on account of its not being an author- 
 ized, or in all respects a correct translation, and 
 also on account of its leaving out a number of 
 books which we consider as the word of frod. 
 Also we object to the Bible, a book confessedly 
 bard in many places to understand, being r^iid 
 
Catholic Education, '55 
 
 out to children and young people by persons 
 often having no real acquaintance with or rev- 
 erence for its sacred text ; and experience shows 
 that the reading of the Bible in this way tends 
 to destroy respect for it, and often leads even to 
 jokes being made upon its words. Lastly, we 
 should always object to having Catholic chil- 
 dren forced to obtain instruction from Protest- 
 ant sources, c'ld to join in prayer under Prot- 
 estant guidance. We do not force our religion 
 on others, we do not want others to force theirs 
 on us. It strikes us that this is nothing but 
 the liberty to which Americans are entitled. 
 
 Another objection that Catholics have to the 
 reading of the Bible in the schools is that it 
 is liable to be accompanied by the recitation 
 of the Protestant form of the Lord's prayer, in 
 which the words for thine is the kingdom, the 
 power, and the glory, forever and ever,'* which 
 we do not recognize as belonging to the sacred 
 text, and which are generally considered by 
 critics to be an addition made by copyists, are 
 found. The omission of the ''Hail Mary,** a 
 prayer, as has been seen, dating from very early 
 times, is also liable to give scandal to our chil- 
 dren. The long and short of it is that we pre- 
 fer to say our own prayers, and to say them in 
 our own way. 
 
 But this whole matter of prayers or Bible- 
 reading is in fact, as has been already stated, 
 
Catholic Education^ 
 
 a comparatively unimportant issue. The real 
 point is that we do not consider the religious 
 instruction given in this way as at all adequate, 
 though it is, of course, better than nothing, ex- 
 cept for the inconveniences already mentioned. 
 
 We regard religion as the most important 
 part of a child's education. 
 
 We are very far from despising the ordinary 
 branches of knowledge taught in the public 
 schools ; though, in common with many others, 
 we consider a great deal of the instruction there 
 imparted to be quite useless, simply a stuffing 
 of the heads and straining of the memory of the 
 young with matters of no use except for those 
 who are to pursue some special line of intellec- 
 tual work in later life. But we consider 
 instruction in the principal points of faith as 
 more necessary than even the most elementary 
 teaching of arithmetic ; since it is much more 
 of an advantage to know the way of salvation 
 than to be able to add up a column of figures. 
 We do not wonder that our Protestant or infidel 
 fellow-citizens do not look at the matter just as 
 we do ; for as they look round on the world in 
 general, it necessarily seems to them that 
 creeds are simply opinions held on a subject 
 on which certainty is quite unattainable, and 
 that every one will have to form his own opin- 
 ion after his school-days are over. But it is 
 different v/ith us. The truths of faith are with 
 
Catholic Education. 
 
 157 
 
 us a matter of certain knowledge, not of opin- 
 ion; they are verities revealed distinctly by. 
 Almighty God, and coming down to us, by the 
 -wonderful means which He has instituted, un- 
 changed and immovable through these eighteen 
 centuries. They are more certain as well as 
 more important than anything else we can 
 know, for it is God Himself who tells them 
 to us. 
 
 We insist, then, that they be not sacrificed to 
 matters of far less value. We do not want to 
 have our children, tired out with mental appli- 
 cation during the week, restricted to an hour at 
 most on Sunday for learning these supremelj" 
 important branches of knowledge. And we 
 desire this not only as Christians, but as pa- 
 triots ; for we know that the teachings of the 
 Catholic religion are the best that can possibly 
 be given to make good citizens. A Catholic 
 who believes what his religion teaches cannot 
 be a socialist, an anarchist, or a free-lover. 
 Indeed, all the real dangers now threatening 
 the social fabric come, as we know very clearly, 
 and as others would also know if they would 
 only try to find out what we really do teach, 
 from the neglect of Catholic doctrine. 
 
 It is, then, no more than reasonable, since we 
 cannot expect that these truths, salutary as 
 they are, should be taught in the public 
 schools, that we should use all lawful means 
 
«58 
 
 Catholic Education. 
 
 to secure them at least for our own people. 
 We do not want to force them on any one else, 
 but we do not want to lose what we have, and 
 what our children ought to have after us. And 
 also it is reasonable that we should protest 
 earnestly against all compulsory schemes of 
 education which would prevent us from teach- 
 ing adequately these most important matters to 
 those who, by the faith they have, will firmly 
 believe and act upon them. And it is also per- 
 fectly reasonable that we should endeavor to 
 have the public school system so arranged that 
 parents, whether Catholic or not, may, where it is 
 practicable, provide for the religious instruction 
 of their children in the same schools in which 
 their secular training is given. In other countries 
 of mixed religions this is done without detriment 
 to good schooling and without making the State 
 responsible for anything more than the secular 
 studies. 
 
 Now, I say that we are willing that the State 
 should teach the children the common branches 
 of knowledge which all should have, such as 
 reading, writing, arithmetic, geography, his* 
 tory, and the more elementary portions of 
 mathematics and of physical science. But 
 there is, no doubt, a difficulty here. 
 
 It is with regard to history especially. We 
 are not willing that distinctively Protestant 
 education on this matter should be given to our 
 children. Wc are not willing, for instance. 
 
Catholic Education. 
 
 1 59 
 
 that they should be taught that I^uther began 
 his Reformation because the Church was selling 
 people permission to commit sin. We do not 
 blame you for teaching that to your children, 
 if you really believe it ; but we know that it is 
 false. We know that an indulgence is not a 
 permission to commit sin ; that every Catholic 
 would be horrified at the idea of a permission 
 to commit sin being given under any circum-* 
 stances, and much more that it should be sold. 
 We cannot tolerate instruction being given to 
 our children which falsely represents the 
 Church as a monster of iniquity. And so 
 with regard to other matters which Protestants 
 hardly notice, and which, perhaps, slip in here 
 and there in connection with almost any sub- 
 ject, so much have they been accustomed to 
 take false statements against the Church for 
 granted, and even to consider them as self- 
 evident truths. As, for example, the common 
 representation in geographies of countries as 
 being enlightened " simply because they are 
 Protestant, while Catholic ones are barely rec- 
 ognized as civilized," if even that courtesy is 
 allowed them. We want our children to learn 
 facts, not opinions. We do not want to fling 
 mud at Protestants, or represent them as hold- 
 ing doctrines which they themselves disclaim ; 
 and if any such statements can be found in otu 
 books, we are ready to expunge them in* 
 
i6o 
 
 Catholic Education. 
 
 stantly. But if they will not do the same for 
 us, we must have our own books ; that is all 
 there is about it. And we have no desire to 
 represent Protestants or infidels as grovelling in 
 ignorance or laziness ; we give them full credit 
 for what they have done and are doing in the 
 natural order, and simply insist that they shall 
 give us credit for what we have also done ; if 
 they will not do us justice, we must do it our- 
 selves. 
 
 We are ready to do everythic^g that we can, 
 without sacrificing our most vital interests, for 
 the convenience of all ; we do not want separate 
 schools for our children if we can in any other 
 way, without unjust burden on ourselves, get 
 the religious instruction for them which they 
 need. We do not want to build up any walls 
 between our children and others unnecessarily ; 
 we want them to be true patriotic Americans, 
 heart and soul devoted to the interests of the 
 glorious nation to which they belong. But we 
 cannot sacrifice the spiritual for the temporal, 
 the interests of eternity for those of this world. 
 
 Try, then, to get rid of these bugbears which 
 have been haunting the English mind for cen- 
 turies about our wanting to subject this coun- 
 try to the Pope ; these visions of armies of 
 Jesuits, in or out of ciisguise, who want to con- 
 trol the politics of the nation for the temporal 
 aggrandizement of the Church. We would 
 
Catholic Education. 
 
 i6i 
 
 like to convert you all to the Catholic faith, 
 that is true ; but we want to do so by reason 
 and truth, not by force or trickery. And we 
 desire your conversion for your own sake, not 
 for any advantage it is going to bring to us. 
 The Pope does not want any temporal power or 
 kingdom, except so much as is needed to make 
 him independent of the nations, so that he can 
 freely exercise his spiritual office, without fear 
 of interference or undue influence from any of 
 them. He would not take the Presidency, or 
 even the permanent sovereignty, of this or any 
 other country, except that of which he has been 
 unjustly deprived. He has got quite enough 
 to attend to as it is. 
 
 What he wants, and what we all want, is 
 simply to have in fact what all Americans have 
 in theory ; thgit is, freedom to worship God 
 according to the dictates of our own conscience, 
 as long as by so doing we do not injure the 
 liberty or the rights of others. That is the 
 whole matter in a nutshell, though your preju- 
 dices may make it hard for you to believe it. 
 
CHAPTER X\. 
 
 THB; ^jd;NKRATlON OF THE) SAINTS, AND OP 
 THKIR IMAGKS. 
 
 X And it is a point on which, more than any- 
 other, the Protestant mind in general entertains 
 false notions of our creed, and consequently 
 objects most vehemently to it. 
 
 It is even said that in order to indulge our 
 idolatrous practices we have gone so far as to 
 suppress the second commandment of the 
 Decalogue, by which the worship of idols is 
 most clearly forbidden. 
 
 It is really a wonderful thing that intelligent 
 people should suppose that we wanted to do 
 such a thing as this, or that w^e could succeed 
 in doing it even if we wanted to. It w^ould be,^ 
 a great deal more reasonable to say that we 
 had a special edition of our own of the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, which Catholic 
 lawyers and statesmen held to be the correct 
 one. Even if you will believe us to be liars 
 and deceivers, this is too palpable a fraud. 
 
 But in fact, if you will take the trouble to 
 look into a Catholic Bible, a book to be found 
 in every Catholic book-store, you will find, in 
 
 article of our profession „ 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 163 
 
 the same place of course as in your own (Exod, 
 XX. 4), the words: ** Thou shalt not make to 
 thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any- 
 thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth 
 beneath, nor of those things that are in the 
 waters under the earth. Thou shalt not. adore 
 them, nor serve them.*' 
 
 And you will find the same thing in our 
 catechisms, large and small. 
 
 It is, however, true that in some of the 
 smaller ones, intended only for little children, 
 this commandment is omitted. But this is 
 simply because it is long and hard to remem- 
 ber, and because it would be difficult for the 
 very young to understand what it means. Be- 
 fore they get through their Sunday-school they 
 have it all in full ; it is not kept back or con- 
 cealed from any Catholic. 
 
 But in fact, even when it is omitted, the 
 omission can hardly do harm. For really the 
 prohibition of the worship of idols which it 
 contains is implicitly contained in the words 
 which go before, and which are always given 
 in all our books, thou shalt not have strange 
 gods before me,** or as it stands in the Protes- 
 tant version, thou shalt have no other gods 
 before me.** And the real truth of the matter 
 is, that Protestants have made a mistake in 
 making two commandments out of what is 
 really one. 
 
164 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 The gist of this one commandment is the 
 worship of the one true God to the exclusion of 
 all others. And when we have the words 
 
 thou shalt not have strange gods before me " 
 we have idolatry completely shut out. If we 
 cannot worship any god but the One, it is plain 
 that we cannot take images for gods, and wor- 
 ship them. These words then, out of which 
 Protestants make their second commandment, 
 are really only a principal application of what 
 goes before. 
 
 To compensate for the error made in dividing 
 the first commandment into cwo, Protestants 
 have been obliged to run two into one some- 
 where else in order to get the number ten, as it 
 should be. They have, therefore, taken the 
 two prohibitions at the end about coveting the 
 neighbor's wife and his goods (which are dis- 
 tinct exactly in the same way as those about 
 adultery and stealing, being the desires cor- 
 responding to these acts) and made one out of 
 them. And because we look at the matter in 
 a different and really fiiore reasonable light, 
 they jump at the conclusion that we want to 
 get idolatry in by suppressing the prohibition 
 of it. They take one little catechism, and that 
 is enough to settle the matter. But I hope you 
 see by this time that we have and teach all 
 this about the making of graven images just 
 the same as you do. 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 165 
 
 But now perhaps you say : *VEven if this is 
 $0, it does not help your case, though it does 
 make a point against us. For if the worship 
 of images is condemned in what you admit to 
 be the word of God, you are all the worse in 
 practically sanctioning and allowing it." 
 
 Still, I think any one keeping up the attack 
 on these lines would begin to lose courage a 
 little. For he would see that when you look 
 at the matter closely, it is getting to be a little 
 hard to show that we are sinning against this 
 law of God. 
 
 For surely this law cannot mean that we are 
 not to make images of any kind. If so, there 
 has been a fearful disregard of it in almost all 
 Christian countries. If that is the sense of it, 
 the sculptor's business is wrong all the way 
 through, and ought to be most severely pro- 
 hibited by law. Those statues of great men 
 ought to be removed from our streets and 
 public squares ; you ought to smash the little 
 statuettes 3^ou probably have in the house and 
 throw the pieces in the ash-barrel ; you ought 
 not, if you value your soul, to buy a Noah's 
 ark for your children ; for the man who got this 
 up broke this commandment in the most 
 wholesale way. 
 
 Oh, no ! you will say,. we are not so foolish 
 as to think that we may never make images of 
 anything at all. What everybody understands 
 
i66 
 
 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 by this law of God is, that we must not worship 
 images. And that is just what you Catholics 
 are doing all the time. Why, you cannot go 
 into a Catholic church but you see some wo- 
 man, or perhaps even a man, who ought to 
 have more sense, kneeling down before one of 
 these images you have, and praying to it as if 
 it were God. - If that is not idolatry, I don't 
 know what is." 
 
 No doubt it seems to you now that you have 
 a good certain charge against us. I^et us see. 
 After all, one should not judge entirely by ap- 
 pearances. If there is any doubt, every one is 
 entitled to the benefit of it before having to 
 bear the grave charge of idolatry. According 
 to the principles of law, one should be con- 
 sidered innocent until his guilt is proved. 
 
 The only real fact the charge is based on is, 
 that the woman is praying, and that while 
 praying she is kneeling before a statue. Now, 
 I suppose that when you pray yourself you are 
 kneeling ; that is the posture which is generally 
 considered proper for prayer, though some ad- 
 vanced Christians pray, or at any rate join in 
 the minister's prayers, without leaving their 
 seats, perhaps bending the head a little, or put' 
 ting their hands or hats before their faces. 
 Still, I hardly think even these would claim 
 that kneeling was an inappropriate position, or 
 showed too much respect. 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 167 
 
 Well, then, if one is kneeling, he must kneel 
 before something, and probably look at some- 
 thing, unless it is of obligation to put one's 
 head down on a chair or a bed (which, I am 
 sorry to say, even Catholics are too apt to do), 
 or to close one's eyes. The difficulty, you see, 
 about either of these methods is that one is 
 quite apt to go to sleep. So it is better to kee{) 
 one's eyes open and the head straight up, 
 though this does require some effort. 
 
 If, then, one does this, is it best to look at a 
 blank wall, or at some other object ? It seems 
 naturally best to look at something which in 
 some way suggests pious thoughts and keeps 
 the mind from wandering. If the mind has no 
 picture presented to it, it will make one of its 
 own, probably. So if we are praying to our 
 lyord Jesus Christ, which the immense majority 
 of Christians, believing in His Divinity, con- 
 sider it perfectly lawful to do, is there any 
 harm in having a representation of Him before 
 our eyes ; a picture of Him such as even Prot- 
 estants often have, as He appeared at some 
 time during His life here, or as we may imagine 
 Him to appear now in heaven ? Will not this 
 help to fix our thoughts on Him ? Really, it is 
 not very easy to see why Protestants should not 
 help themselves in this way to pray well and 
 fervently. And even if one is praying, ^% we 
 generally 4o; to the Eternal Father W^mmM, 
 
i68 
 
 The Ve7teration of the Saints. 
 
 why not have before our eyes a representation 
 pf His well-beloved Son, and especially of His 
 Sacrifice on the Cro^s, through which our 
 prayers become efficacious with God? Why 
 there should be any objection to praying before 
 a crucifix is really a puzzle ; still more is it a 
 puzzle why Christians should object to having 
 a crucifix in their house, when they would 
 willingly have a picture or a statue of George 
 Washington or Abraham lyincoln. 
 
 Well, now let us go a step farther. Suppose 
 you had some dear friend whom you confidently 
 believed to be now in heaven ; one whose 
 whole life had been to you an example of piety 
 and virtue ; one, the very thought of whom 
 would bring you nearer to God and make you 
 feel the value of prayer, and induce you to pray 
 as this one did ; would it not help you in your 
 prayer to have the picture of such an one be- 
 fore your eyes? 
 
 Oh, well ! you say, this is all very fine ; 
 but everybody knows that Catholics are not 
 using their pictures and statues, or even their 
 crucifixes, in this way. They are making real 
 idols of them ; attaching, that is, a superstitious 
 value to them ; believing that these images and 
 pictures have a real power in themselves ; in 
 short, making gods of them.*' 
 
 The true and the short answer to this is, that 
 nobody knows anything of the kind; for no- 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 169 
 
 body can know something which is entirely 
 false. No Catholic, however ignorant, has any 
 such idea as this, as you would find out if yoti^ 
 would ask any one whom you found praying in 
 this way. It might not be safe always to ask 
 such a question, for it would be regarded as an 
 insult, and might naturally provoke a sharp 
 reply, if not something more, unless the person 
 questioned happened to be a saint. The feeling 
 it ought to excite would be pity for the igno- 
 rance of the questioner ; but people are not al- 
 ways reasonable, and might be apt to look at 
 the matter in a different way. 
 
 It is true, however, that the person asked, if 
 patient enough to exf)lain the matter to you, 
 would quite probably give an account of what 
 he or she was doing somewhat different from 
 that which I have thus far given. It might be 
 admitted that the prayers now being made were 
 addressed not immediately to God, but to the 
 saint whose picture or statue was there. 
 
 But if so, what then ? Suppose that the dear 
 friend of whom I have spoken were to appear 
 visibly before you from heaven, would you 
 simply converse with him on ordinary matters ? 
 Would it not occur to you that if he prayed a 
 good deal on earth, there was no reason why 
 this habit of prayer should have been dropped, 
 especially as now he did not need to pray for 
 hixBself? Would you not tho^ msk be 
 
170 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 would pray for you, that you might also save 
 your soul, as he had done ? Do you seriously 
 believe that if your clergyman, your father, or 
 your mother, can pray for you in this world, 
 that they cannot do so if they are admitted to 
 the presence of God in heaven ? 
 
 Oh ! you say, **of course I suppose they 
 could, and probably I would ask them to do so. 
 But you see it is not the person in heaven that 
 appears to you, but only a picture of a statue, 
 and that of somebody you never knew in this 
 world, and who probably does not know or care 
 any more about you than the picture or statue 
 itself does." 
 
 Here I acknowledge that you have at last 
 made a reasonable point. And I do not under- 
 take to prove to you that when we pray before a 
 picture or a statue of a saint, that that saint in- 
 fallibly hears or knows what we are saying, or 
 even what we are doing. But I do say that 
 it is not impossible or absurd that they may. 
 Let us listen to some words of our I^ord that 
 have some bearing on this point. He says 
 (Matt. XXV. 20): And he that had received 
 tiie five talents, coming, brought other five 
 talents, saying : Lord, thou didst deliver to me 
 five talents, behold I have gained other five 
 over and above. His lord said to him : Well 
 done, good and faithful servant, because thou 
 ba3t been faithful over a few tbingi; I will place 
 
The Veneration of the faints, \f\ 
 
 thee over many things : enter t^ipu into the joy 
 of thy lord." And in St. lyuke xix. 17 we 
 find a similar passage : Well done, thou good 
 servant, because thou hast been faithful in a 
 little, thou shalt have power over ten cities." 
 
 These passages show clearly what indeed we 
 should naturally expect ; namely, that the ser- 
 vants of God who have pleased Him in this 
 world shall in the next have their opportu- 
 nities and consequently their powers for good, 
 very much extended; that they shall be able 
 without effort to attend to much more than they 
 could possibly have attended to here. And it 
 is not for us to place the limit to this extension 
 of their powers, as long as it remains finite ; 
 while it is that, it is infinitely inferior to the 
 power of God itself. And we should also bear 
 in mind the immense extension in late years of 
 even our natural powers by natural means, 
 such as the telegraph particularly ; for if so 
 much can be done na*^urally, how much more 
 supematurally ? And if great men here on 
 earth have been able to attend, simultaneously, 
 as it would seem, to many times as much busi- 
 ness as the ordinary man could manage, why 
 cannot the saints in heaven even far surpass 
 them ? 
 
 Another consideration musf now be added. 
 We must remember that the saints in heaven 
 see God face to face ; as St. Paul says (I, Cor. 
 
172 
 
 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 xiii. 12): We see now through a glass in a 
 dark manner : but then face to face. Now I 
 know in part ; but then shall I know even as I 
 am known.'* They can then, without the in- 
 terposition of other means, know directly what 
 God knows, so far as it pleases Him to reveal it 
 to them. 
 
 And besides all that has been said, we must 
 all acknowledge that even if the saint does not 
 know of each prayer that we make, asking his 
 or her intercession, at any rate God knows it ; 
 and He is pleased with the honor shown to one 
 who has been His friend in life, and is many 
 times more His friend now ; for He knows that 
 this honor is not intended to shut out the honor 
 due to Himself any more than the good opinion 
 which we have of a holy man on eartji does. 
 Why, then, should He not grant Himself the 
 favor which He knows that we are asking, 
 even more readily when these friends of His are 
 invoked, since He knows that it is not ac- 
 companied by any distrust of His own goodness 
 and mercy? 
 
 But there is one thing more to fall back on. 
 You say that kneeling is too much honor to pay 
 to any one but God Himself. 
 
 Now, this idea is one which perhaps would 
 hardly occur to any one but an American, or a 
 citizen at any rate of some republic, where 
 one shakes hands with the chief magistrate, 
 
The Veneration of the Saints, 
 
 173 
 
 and calls him plain **Mr.*' ; the subjects of 
 monarchies, even of constitutional ones, are ac- 
 customed to a good deal of ceremony in the 
 presence of princes, even going so far as genu- 
 flexions. But we Americans do not like these 
 obeisances, and feel that we can have all due 
 respect for authority interiorly without showinj, 
 it in this way. 
 
 Probably we are in a great measure right ; at 
 any rate there is 110 doubt that these ceremonies 
 of earthly courts may proceed merely from 
 human pride, and in any case that the interior 
 is vastly more important than the exterior. 
 God Himself infinitely prefers a contrite and 
 humble heart to an}^ amount of exterior posing. 
 But still the interior naturally suggests the ex- 
 terior; if one really feels interiorly abased, it 
 is likely that he will feel like taking a humble 
 position of body, and will do so unless some 
 principle restrains him ; unless he thinks or 
 believes that it would be wrong for him to do so. 
 
 The question then is, Is it really wrong to 
 kneel before any one but God ? If it is not, 
 surely we can be allowed to do so, if we like. 
 We are not forced to do so, unless by refusing 
 we disturb the peace and quiet of an assembly, 
 as would be the case if a person should insist 
 on standing up in a Catholic chnrch because 
 the prayers happening to be said at the time 
 were addressed to the Blessed Virgin or some 
 
174 Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 saint. If any one objects to kneeling in church, 
 he has an easy remedy ; he can either quietly 
 leave the church, or he can at least remain seated. 
 
 Well, then, to come to the point, if it is wrong 
 to kneel before any one but God, we ought, if 
 any account can be found in the Bible of any 
 one kneeling before a holy man or an angel, to 
 find that he was told not to do so. But in fact 
 it is just the other way. 
 
 We find in the first chapter of the second 
 book of Kings (we call it the fourth book) an 
 account of several messengers being sent by 
 the king to Elijah (or Elias, as we call him, and 
 as your Bible also does in the New Testa- 
 ment) . The first two did not treat the prophet 
 with much respect, but ordered him, in the 
 name of the king, to come down from the hill 
 where he was. The result was that they, with 
 the men they had brought with them, were con- 
 sumed by fire from heaven. 
 
 The third learned wisdom from the fate of 
 the others, and coming to Elias, **fell on his 
 knees before him (v. 13) and begged him to 
 spare his life. Was Elias angry now at this 
 ** idolatry'' on the messenger's part, and pun- 
 ished him (or rather, did God punish him ? for of 
 course Elias had in himself no such power) for 
 his showing too great reverence, as he had the 
 others for showing too little? By no means. 
 On the contrary we find (v. 15) that ''the 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 175 
 
 Angel of the Lord spoke to Elias, saying, Go 
 down with him; fear not." 
 
 We also find (II. Kings iv. 27 and 37) that 
 the Sunamite woman offered similar homage to 
 Elisha, falling at his feet, and that the prophet 
 would not have her corrected or disturbed for 
 so doing. 
 
 Let us look now at the tenth chapter of the 
 book of Daniel. We find there that Daniel, 
 as he was standing by the bank of the Tigris, 
 suddenly saw a magnificent and terrible angel ; 
 and that at the sight of him he fell on the 
 ground in a faint. The Angel roused him from 
 this, and set him on his knees and hands, and 
 spoke a few words to him ; he did not rebuke 
 him for this, as it were, slavish position, but 
 actually placed him in it. As, however, he 
 wished to inspire him with confidence, and to 
 remove his terror, that he might listen atten- 
 tively and intelligently to the words which were 
 to be said, he then told him to stand ; and 
 Daniel stood trembling, evidently much prefer- 
 ring to remain in his more humble position. 
 There is not the least hint that Daniel believed 
 that he was seeing God Himself; the vision was 
 in fact that of an angel, or as the prophet says, 
 it seemed to him of a man (v. 5) ; still he was 
 afraid to stand upright before one whom he 
 recognized as a representative of God, And 
 certainly Daniel, 9 mn jnpst ^eciglly divinely 
 
176 
 
 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 enlightened even among the prophets '.Yould 
 have known if it v^as wrong to kneel, and 
 would have got on his feet of his own accord. 
 
 Now, let us look at the instance given in the 
 Revelation (or Apocalypse, as we call it) of St. 
 John. It is true that there the angel at whose 
 feet St. John fell (xix. 10) corrected him for 
 the adoration he was about to give, and said, 
 ''See thou do it not; I am thy fellow-servant, 
 and of thy brethren who have the testimony of 
 Jesus. Adore God.'* But this was plainly 
 because St. John thought that Jesus Himself 
 was standing before him, and wished to pay 
 him divine honor interiorly, as well as the 
 exterior obeisance. It may be observed also 
 that we are not told that the angel ordered St. 
 John to change his bodily position, which he 
 had already assumed. 
 
 These instances, together with one which I 
 am about to mention to illustrate what I shall 
 shortly say, are all that occur to me in the 
 Bible as proving anything on this matter, one 
 way or the other. And for our side, one 
 instance is sufficient. If it is essentially 
 wrong to kneel before an angel or a man, it 
 cannot be right under any circumstances ; 
 whereas it may be right in itself, but wrongly 
 intended in some cases, and therefore reproved 
 in those cases. 
 
 But the fact is that the worship given by 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 177 
 
 Catholics to angels and saints, and expressed 
 by kneeling or other outward signs, though 
 not, as seems clear from the above texts, essen- 
 tially wrong to be paid to them simply as ex- 
 alted beings, specially honored and beloved by 
 God, is really to a great extent a worship of 
 God Himself; of His divine mii^jesty and per- 
 fection as shown in them. It is because they 
 represent God that we specially honor them, as 
 one honors a king or a nation in the ambassador 
 as representing lhat king or nation. To bring 
 this out clearly, let us again turn to the Bible 
 (Gen. xviii.) We shall there find that the 
 lyord appeared to Abraham as he was sitting 
 at the door of his tent. The vision was in 
 the form of three men ; this has been generally 
 supposed to represent the Holy Trinity. Abra- 
 ham went to meet them, and adored down 
 to the ground," as our version has it. Yours 
 says, bowed' himself toward the ground." 
 But, at any rate, it is clear that he was paying 
 God honor in their persons, whatever position 
 he assumed ; for he said, * * My I^ord, if I have 
 found favor in thy sight, pass not away from 
 thy servant." It is also, however, plain that 
 he did not regard them as being simply God, 
 but as representing Him, for he offered to wash 
 their feet, and asked them to eat bread, and 
 to rest under the tree; just what he would 
 have said to any honored human guests. 
 
.75 
 
 The v^eneration of the Saints. 
 
 It is, then, in some respects, a worship to 
 God that we pay when we honor His saints, in 
 whatever way we may do it. And it is not on 
 account of their excellence in themselves that 
 we honor them, but on account of their nearness 
 to Him, and their showing forth of His divine 
 perfections. 
 
 And experience shows that, so far from our 
 hearts being estranged from God by our honor- 
 ing the saints and praying to them, it is, as a 
 rule, those Catholics who are most devout to 
 the Blessed Virgin and the saints who also 
 love God the most, and give the surest test 
 of that love by being willing to make and 
 actually making the greatest sacrifices for Him. 
 
 I have said a good deal about the matter of 
 exterior reverence, because our actions in this 
 way are so much misunderstood. But it is 
 clear, if we think of it reasonably, that of itself 
 the matter is not an essential one. If it were 
 essentially necessary to be always kneeling 
 when speaking to God, not only would most 
 Protestants be much at fault, but the prayers 
 of all of us would be much restricted. There 
 is nothing in the exterior actions of worship 
 which is strictly necessary, or which has any 
 absolute significance ; all really depends on the 
 interior spirit and intention, which expresses 
 itself in different, but not necessarily or even 
 possibly, in adequate exterior forms. 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 179 
 
 Now, in connection with this matter of the 
 veneration of the saints, I want also to speak 
 of another closely related to it ; and that is, the 
 value which we place on relics. 
 
 Really this is nothing peculiar to Catholics. 
 We have only to visit any museum to see the 
 attraction which there is for people; in general 
 in the relics of great or celebrated men, and 
 even of those who have been noted for bad 
 lives. The coat or writing-desk of Washington 
 or Napoleon is looked at with great interest, 
 and many would be glad to pay a high price for 
 such an article ; and so they would, quite likely, 
 for a piece of the rope with which some notori- 
 ous criminal was hung. It is true that there 
 are some who do not care about such things ; 
 but I think they are the exception, anc by no 
 means the rule. 
 
 The feeling cannot, perhaps, be logically rea- 
 soned out and accounted for, but it is there all 
 the same. It is really hard to conceive how a 
 Christian could possibly be indifferent to, or 
 uninterested in the seamless garment of our 
 lyord, or the crown of thorns which was placed 
 on His head at the time of His Passion ; or that 
 he would not wish very much to have a portion 
 of either of these for his own. If he would 
 highly value a lock of his mother's hair, or any 
 other souvenir of one who had been so dear to 
 Uim, is it possible that he would be indifferent 
 
i8o The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 to a memento of One whom he professes to love 
 more than father and mother. ' ' He that loveth 
 father or mother more than me, is not worthy 
 of me/' says our Lord Himself (Matt. x. 37) ; 
 how, then, can a Christian be indifferent to the 
 relics of his Saviour? 
 
 And if we love. Him, we love also in a special 
 way His fxiends, those who are nearest and 
 dearest to Him; His Mother, His foster-father 
 St. Joseph, His Precursor St. John Baptist, His 
 beloved disciple St. John the Apostle, and the 
 other Apostles to whom He said, * * I will not 
 now call you servants : for the servant knoweth 
 not what his lord doth. But 1 have called you 
 friends ' ' ; also the holy martyrs who laid down 
 their lives for Him, and the saints who, more 
 perfectly and completely than Christians in gen- 
 eral, took up their cross and followed Him. So 
 in a similar way we prize and treasure memen- 
 toes of them, as we would His own. 
 
 ' The only difference, then, which one would 
 expect to find in this matter of mementoes and 
 relics, as also in that of pictures and statues, 
 between the Christian and the heathen would 
 be in the persons in whom interest was thus 
 shown. And this is the difference We" do find. 
 The world has pictures and statues of its great 
 ones; of great rulers, military leaders, states- 
 men, 4)oets, inventors in the arts and sciences, 
 amd it values their relics ; the Christian has his 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. i8l 
 
 pictures, statues, and relics of those who have 
 been distinguished in the matter which he must 
 needs regard as of paramount importance — that 
 is, the love of God. 
 
 But you will say, It is all well enough for 
 Catholics to care about relics of the saints" 
 (and why not for Protestants, too ?) , but what 
 we object to is that they attach a superstitious 
 veneration to them. They think that the pos- 
 session of a relic will insure their salvation." 
 
 I do not deny that there is a possibility of su- 
 perstition in this matter; but there is always 
 a danger of any religious conviction running 
 into superstition, and the only way to certainly 
 guard against this is to extinguish the religious 
 feeling too, and indeed to deny the supernatural 
 altogether; but one cannot take this latter 
 course and remain a Christian at all, unless one 
 can be considered as a Christian who simply re- 
 gards Christ as a great and good man. But the 
 Catholic Church always labors to prevent and 
 discourage this tendency to superstition, not to 
 increase and encourage it. 
 
 The occasion for it lies in something that we 
 cannot get rid of, unless we are to gc : rid of the 
 Bible itself. For the Bible tells us that God 
 has been pleased to work miracles and confer 
 ^ great blessings by the means of relics. We 
 find (II. Kings xiii. 21) that when a dead body 
 was put into the sepulchre of EHsha, **and 
 
182 
 
 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 touched the bones of Elisha, the man came to 
 life, and stood upon his feet." 
 
 We find also (Matt. ix. 20-22) that a certain 
 woman came behind our I^ord **and touched 
 the hem of his garment ; for she said within her- 
 self, If I shall touch only his garment, I shall 
 be healed.*' And she was healed. Our Lord 
 did not call her act superstition, but faith ; He 
 said to her, '*Be of good heart, daughter, thy 
 faith hath made thee whole.'* " 
 
 Again (Acts v. 15), we find that the people 
 brought the sick into the streets, and placed 
 them so that Peter's shadow at least might fall 
 on them ; and it would appear from the next 
 verse that even these were cured. And (Acts 
 xix. 12) that there were brought from his 
 body" (that of Paul) **to the sick handker- 
 chiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from 
 them, and the wicked spirits went out of them." 
 
 May I ask, why, if such things happened 
 then, they should not also happen now ? That 
 they do happen, we have the most ample evi- 
 dence. But more about this later. 
 
 Of course, the Catholic Church understands, 
 and teaches her children, that miraculous favors 
 given by means of relics, or in any other way, 
 are primarily for the glory of God and of His 
 saints, and do not come as a matter of course, 
 or infallibly, by the use of certain external 
 means ; and also that they must, as a rule^ be 
 
The Veneration of the Saints. 1^53 
 
 accompanied or even preceded by good and 
 holy dispositions on the part of those who re- 
 ceive them. But human frailty or wickedness 
 does not always attend to this salutary teach- 
 ing, and abuses these supernatural gifts, losing 
 the benefit of them, as it does also with the 
 natural gifts and blessings of God ; but that is 
 not the fault of God, nor is it that of the 
 Church, which labors to remove and prevent 
 these dangerous and scandalous errors. 
 
 But now you have another objection. You 
 say that there is a vast amount of fraud about 
 this business of relics ; for example, that there 
 are more relics of the true Cross than would 
 make a great many crosses of that size ; and 
 that this fraud is endorsed by the Church. 
 
 I will ask you to take the example cited, and 
 make a simple calculation on it. I think you 
 will allow that the cross was probably equal in 
 bulk to a beam of wood 200 inches long, 6 wide, 
 and 4 thick, which makes 4,800 cubic inches. 
 Now, an average relic of the true cross would 
 .not exceed a piece i-ioth of an inch each 
 way ; indeed, this would really much exceed 
 the average. But even at this, 3^ou see we 
 would have 4,800,000 such relics, or one to 
 every fifty Catholics. But one to every thou- 
 sand would come nearer to the proportion of 
 those who actually have them. Indeed, this 
 would be a considerable over-estimate. 
 
184 The Veneration of the Saints. 
 
 Again you will say, But they have the head 
 of such a saint preserved in several different 
 places. Here is certainly an unblushing and 
 obvious fraud.'* 
 
 You make this objection because you do not 
 understand our way of speaking about these 
 matters. Catholics understand well enough 
 that by the head is meant a portion, perhaps 
 a notable portion, of the head. This is en- 
 closed in a reliquary repress nting a head, and 
 you imagine that the whole head is supposed to 
 be there ; but no ane except yourseL^ w^'^ sees 
 it thinks of any such, thing. 
 
 That there should be, howf Ter, so'^e mis- 
 takes about relics is obviously unavoidable, 
 and the unscrupulous, no doubt, will attempt 
 frauds, and sometimes succeed. But the 
 Church has always taken great care, and 
 takes more and more every year, to prevent 
 this ; and does not give certificates of genuine- 
 ness, or authentics," as we call them, to any 
 relics without careful examination by competent 
 and learned officials. 
 
 I think you will see that there is nothing un- 
 reasonable about this devotion ; but if any 
 Catholic does not take interest in it, he cer- 
 tainly is not obliged to. Nor is any one re- 
 quired to pray habitually to the saints, as long 
 as he does not object to it on principle ; and to 
 fail to ever do so would seem to imply such an 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 185 
 
 objection, as, for instance, if one should refu^ 
 to say a Hail Mary now and then ; for thyi 
 prayer has the highest possible sanction, both 
 directly by the Church and by Catholic feeling 
 and practice; and to ignore it could hardly 
 mean anything but heresy on the par^ of thfe 
 person so acting. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THB REMAINDER OF THE PROFESSION. 
 
 THE remainder of the profession is princi- 
 pally occupied with matters which ha\^ 
 already been discussed. I have already treated 
 at some length of the great and decisive au* 
 thority which we attach to the Scriptures, or 
 the Bible, and the way in which we believe that 
 this Word of God should be read and under* 
 stood. 
 
 By the Apostolic and Ecclesiastical Tradi- 
 tions'' is understood the traditions which havle 
 come down to us, by word of mouth or by un- 
 inspired writings, with regard to the faith of the 
 Church. That these are of value, and are re^ 
 ognized as being so in the Bible itself (II. The^ 
 ii. 14), where we read: Therefore, brethrei^ 
 stand fast ; and hold the traditions which yoji 
 have learned, whether by word, or by our 
 
1 86 The Remainder of the Profession. 
 
 epistle.'' Also (II. Tim. ii. 2) we find: *'And 
 the things which thou hast heard of me by 
 many witnesses, the same commend to faithful 
 men, who shall be fit to teach others also.'' 
 
 It is perfectly in accordance with reason, 
 common sense, and the necessities of the case, 
 to say nothing of the actual facts of history, 
 that the teaching of the faith in the first few 
 centuries ^should have been mainly oral, and 
 that tradition should have been, as it actually 
 was, the main guide of the faithful, especially 
 during the ages of persecution. In later time$ 
 we do not depend on it so much, as the Scrip-, 
 tures are so easily accessible, and the decisions 
 of the Church so abundant. i 
 
 The profession now proceeds to include gen- 
 erally the other matters of faith resting on the 
 decrees of the Church, specially those made ia 
 the General Councils. Of these twenty-one 
 are recognized, as follows j the places and datea 
 are given : 
 
 I. — Nicsea or Nice I., « 
 
 • A.D. 
 
 325 
 
 2. — Constantinople I., • 
 
 <« 
 
 381 
 
 3. — Ephesus, 
 
 if 
 
 431 
 
 4. — Chalcedon, 
 
 «« 
 
 451 
 
 5. — Constantinople II., 
 
 «• 
 
 553 
 
 6. — Constantinople III., 
 
 if 
 
 680-81 
 
 7. — Nice II., 
 
 Cf 
 
 787 
 
 8. — Constantinople IV., 
 
 if 
 
 869-70 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 1 8jr 
 
 
 AT) T 
 
 TO — — T^oTTif* TTvatpran^ TT 
 
 
 
 ** TT7Q 
 
 TO — ^T^ntTif* ^T^atf^rflti^ TV 
 
 xvvjiiic ^x^ai>vxciii.y x v •! 
 
 121^ 
 
 • X ^ X J 
 
 13.-— ivyonb X., » • 
 
 
 i4»^^-Myyii3 "*■■*••» • • 
 
 
 i.^.*"^ V ICi-lilC, • • • 
 
 ** T 1 T T 
 
 
 # X^X / XC9 
 
 X 7 •^^■Oo-olv, • • • 
 
 
 
 ^* T/170— AC 
 
 19. — Rome (Lateran) V., 
 
 " I5I2-I7 
 
 20. — Trent, • . 
 
 . " 1545-63 
 
 21. — Rome (Vatican), • 
 
 " 1869-70 
 
 These councils were composed of bishops 
 gathered from all parts of the Catholic world. 
 All Catholic bishops are invited to such as- 
 semblies, and have a vote on the matters dis- 
 * cussed. The last two are specially mentioned 
 in the profession as treating of matters more 
 controverted now by Christians in general. 
 The Council of Trent was called on account 
 of the Protestant Reformation ; it defined the 
 dogmas of faith which were impugned by the 
 Protestants, and effected various reforms in the 
 matter of Church discipline ; there were corrup- 
 tions and evil practices which had crept in, 
 and really needed reformation ; and this true 
 reformation of the Church was thus legitimately 
 and quite thoroughly eflfected. 
 
1 88 The Remainder of the Profession. 
 
 The Council of the Vatican was opened by 
 Pius IX. on December 8, 1869; it was ad- 
 journed in the following year on account of the 
 troubles of the times, which culminated in the 
 seizure of Rome on September 20 of that year 
 by the troops of Victor Emanuel, King of Italy. 
 In this council various matters concerning the 
 primitive truths of religion were defined against 
 modern infidelity, and the infallibility of the 
 Pope, as it has been e^jiplained above, was 
 solemnly declared. 
 
 In assenting to and accepting the decrees of 
 these councils, and therefore, also, specially on 
 account of the decision just mentioned, the de- 
 crees of the Pope himself when he solemnly and 
 formally teaches the faith to the Christian 
 ■^orld, we simply make a logical and reasonable 
 ^ct. It is not necessary, in order to accept and 
 believe what God teaches us by the means 
 which He has established, that we should know 
 j5recisely what it is that He teaches. We be- 
 lieve it beforehand, just in the same way, but 
 a far higher degree of certainty, as a jury 
 believes in the testimony of a witness of un- 
 impeachable character, before he opens his* lips 
 io give it. 
 
 It is, however, the desire of the Church that 
 we and all the world should know just what 
 our faith teaches us on every point. Our Di- 
 vine lyord committed His doctrine to His dis* 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 1 89 
 
 ciples secretly, but He instructed them to pro- 
 claim it publicly. That which I tell you in 
 the dark, speak ye in the light," said He; 
 * * and that which you hear in the ear, preach 
 ye upon the house-tops.'* , 
 
 This the apostles did ; and though for a time 
 it became absolutely necessary, on account of 
 persecution, to observe some secrecy (for 
 Christ Himself had said, Give not that which 
 is holy to dogs ; neither cast ye your pearls be- 
 fore swine, lest perhaps they trample them under 
 their feet, and turning upon you, they tear 
 you*0) such is not the case now. There is 
 nothing which we need or wish to keep back of 
 what we believe, either with regard to Catholic 
 faith or practice ; and in what follows I propose 
 to explain some points which have not been 
 spoken of in this profession. 
 
 Before proceeding to these, however, I wish 
 to remark on some words which may give a 
 false impression in the concluding sentence, in 
 which it is said, detest and abjure every 
 ^rror, heresy, and sect.'* By this is meant not 
 mat we detest any person who does not em- 
 brace our faith, or detest any sect in the sense 
 that we hate the persons belonging to it ; but 
 that we detest heresy — that is, we hate the false- 
 hood which is contrary to the truth, and also 
 the spirit of denial of what one knows to be the 
 truth, for that is heresy, properly so-called; 
 
190 The Remainder of the Profession. 
 
 and that we detest the separation of what 
 Christ said should be one fold and one shep- 
 herd (John X. 16), into various bodies out of 
 harmony with each other and with separate in- 
 stitutions and governments, as being a thing in 
 itself wrong and displeasing to God ; but not 
 that we hate the individuals who have been un- 
 fortunately in this way alienated from the visi- 
 ble communion of Christ ^s Church. 
 
 I shall also now treat of the opening words or 
 preamble of the profession which you remember 
 I passed by at the natural place • Some part of 
 what has been said in the course of our ex- 
 planation seems to be properly required to un- 
 derstand this preamble fully ; or at least we are 
 now better prepared to understand it than we 
 should have been then. It propounds a doc- 
 trine which gives difl&culty to many ; that is, 
 that * * no one can be saved without that faith 
 which the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman 
 Church holds, believes, and teaches.*' 
 
 Now the question is, what precisely is meant 
 by this ? It certainly seems plainly contrary to 
 what, as has been said before, we must admit 
 as an evident fact; namely, that the holy 
 patriarchs, prophets, and saints of the Old 
 Testament have always been believed to have 
 been saved, and probably many others also, 
 who lived in those times, when they could not 
 possibly have held this faith, for the very good 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 19% 
 
 reason that it had not then been made known 
 to the world. So that they do not come under 
 the general statement made here. 
 
 But if we examine, we see at least that we 
 need not concern ourselves with this seeming 
 difficulty, for it is only said ' ' no one can be 
 saved,'* not **no one ever could have been 
 saved.'* It is, then, at any rate only a question 
 of the way in which we can be saved at the pres- 
 ent time. 
 
 But it has been already shown, in our dis- 
 cussion of the article of the profession concern- 
 ing everlasting life,'* that there can hardly be 
 a difference between those who are now living 
 entirely out of the reach of the Catholic 
 Church, and those who lived before our Lord 
 came down from heaven. For both the Catho- 
 lic faith is equally impossible. And the same 
 may be said for those (and there may be a 
 good many such) who, though they have in- 
 deed heard that there is an institution called 
 the Catholic or Roman (perhaps they havQ 
 known it as the Romish) Church, still have no 
 suspicion whatever that it can possibly be the 
 true Church established by God on earth. AH 
 these people, whether the obstacle, so to speak, 
 between them and the Church be time, space, 
 or a prejudice for which they are in no way to 
 blame, are said to be in invincible ignorance *• 
 of the true faith, and we believe that they may 
 
192 The Remainder of the Profession. 
 
 be saved, if they are faithful to the light and 
 the means of grace they have, even if these are 
 not sufficient to bring them into the true 
 Church before they die. 
 
 What is meant, therefore, by saying, that no 
 one can be saved without the faith of the Catho- 
 lic Church, is not that an explicit knowledge of 
 this faith is absolutely necessary, but that no 
 one can presume to dispense with it, to take 
 something else in its place, or to say, as so 
 many do, that it makes no difference what a 
 man believes, as long as his life is right. This 
 last idea, plausible as it seems to many, is 
 obviously absurd ; for it assumes either that a 
 man's life can be right when he is indifferent as 
 to whether he knows or does God's will or not ; 
 or that it is impossible there can be any truth 
 revealed from heaven to show us how to live, 
 and that all the information needed on that 
 subject is not only attainable by our reason but 
 even actually now in the possession of every 
 liuman being. One might as well say, It 
 makes no diflference whether a sea-captain has 
 a compass and sextant or not, as long as he 
 makes a straight track for the port he wishes to 
 reach." Very true, no doubt; but how is he 
 going to lay his course correctly unless he has 
 the instruments which enable him to do so ? If 
 he has lost his instruments, or is unable to pro- 
 cure anything of the kind, God may be merci* 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 193 
 
 ful to him and bring him safe to port without 
 them; but to say, don't care about instru- 
 ments, I can get along all right without,** is 
 simply fool-hardiness. Just so it is fool-hardi- 
 ness for any one to say, * ' I can save my soul 
 without the faith of the Church, and I don't 
 care whether it is true or not." If he, through 
 the fault of his ancestors, has lost sight cf the 
 faith altogether, or if he has always lived in 
 some remote part of the world to which it has 
 not penetrated, he may be saved like the igno- 
 rant mariner, by a special mercy of God ; but 
 this special mercy cannot be expected if, when 
 the faith is attainable, he neglects to avail him- 
 self of it. He is then like the captain who, 
 passing through the city where instruments can 
 be got, neglects to procure them, though he has 
 the money in his pocket. 
 
 'So you see that what is meant by saying that 
 no one can be saved without the Catholic faith, 
 Is substantially the san^e as saying that no one 
 can reach his port safely without instruments. 
 No one can be saved without it ; that is, no one 
 can be saved who wilfully rejects or neglects it. 
 -^^But it must also be said that salvation is 
 difficult for those who, even without their own 
 fault, are deprived of the faith, just as naviga- 
 tion is difficult for the seaman even without his 
 fault, deprived of what he needs, or success im- 
 probable in any handiwork without the proper 
 
194 Remainder of the Profession. 
 
 tools. For one inculpably ignorant of the faith, 
 though not punished for that, is yet necessarily 
 deprived of the great aids which it furnishes for 
 the forgiveness and the prevention of sin in 
 general. He is, like other people, conceived 
 and bom in original sin ; ordinarily this is only 
 removed by baptism. Christ Himself says: 
 
 Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be 
 bom again of water and the Holy Ghost, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God" 
 (John iii. 5). Still, the Church believes that 
 those for whom baptism is practically impossi- 
 ble can be saved if they have sufficiently per- 
 fect dispositions, loving and tuming to God 
 with their whole heart. This we call the bap- 
 tism of desire. ^ 
 
 But even should original and actual sin be 
 taken away in this manner, still the temptation 
 to sin remains, and the weakness to resist 
 which original sin, and perhaps actual sin also, 
 has caused. This is the case with baptized 
 Christians also, and with Catholics as well as 
 others. A battle, it may be a long and a hard 
 one, has to be fought with sin before the king- 
 dom of heaven can be won. But the Catholic 
 in this battle is helped and fortified by the 
 Sacraments, to which the unbaptized have no 
 access, and of which the Protestant is prac- 
 tically ignorant. For we believe, and facts 
 wbich we cannot properly discuss in a book of 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 195 
 
 this kind justify us in believing, that there 
 are no valid clerical orders among Protestants 
 properly so-called, except in some rare in- 
 stances; the Protestant, then, even though he 
 be validly baptized, has no access to the Sacra- 
 ment of Penance; and indeed few Protestants 
 make any endeavor to avail themselves of it. 
 If then, after once receiving the grace of God 
 he should be so unfortunate, as is only too pro- 
 bable, to fall into mortal sin, it must be for- 
 given him without this great help ; this is in- 
 deed possible, but it is comparatively difficult, 
 as will be seen more clearly later. Then there 
 is for him no Real Body and Blood of Christ in 
 the Holy Eucharist to strengtl;en him and give 
 renewed life to his soul.^** Except you eat the 
 flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, 
 you shall not have life in you," says our Lord 
 (John vi. 54); and though no one can v/eli hold 
 that salvation is impossible without the actual 
 reception of Holy Communion, still no doubt it 
 is for Catholics practically necessary for t!ie 
 nourishment of the soul, for the extirpation of 
 vicious habits and the formation of solid virtue, 
 and for perseverance to the end, on which 
 everything depends. And if it is so for Catho- 
 lics, why not for others as well? ^ 
 
 Again, the Protestant has no Sacrament of 
 Confirmation by which to receive the permanent 
 grace of the Holy Ghost^ to make his faith solid 
 
196 The Remainder of the Prdfes^ton. 
 
 and firm against the assaults of the enemy ; no 
 Sacrament of Extreme Unction, to prepare him 
 for his last combat. He has to leave the world, 
 as our great poet says, unhouseled, dis- 
 appointed, unaneled'*; how many chances are 
 against him, even though he be in perfectly 
 good faith about his religion, and trying to do 
 his very best ! 
 
 These difl&culties of which I have spoken do 
 not exist to the same extent in those churches 
 which, like the Greek and other Oriental ones, 
 have retained valid orders, and have, except in 
 what would now be considered by people in 
 general as matters of small consequence, the 
 same doctrine as the Catholic Church. ^ What 
 separates them from us is principally what we 
 call schism y for which their individual members 
 can hardly, as a rule, be to blame, and which 
 moreover has not deprived them of the means 
 of grace established in the Church. Russian 
 soldiers, for instance, were attended by French 
 priests in the Crimean war ; they had always 
 been accustomed to receive the sacraments, and 
 expected them at the hour of death as they 
 had during life. H I 
 
 You see now, I think, what is meant by our 
 saying that no one can be saved without the 
 faith which the Catholic Church teaches. 
 Principally that no one can be saved by some 
 so-called faith or opinion which he selects for 
 
The Remainder of the Profession. 197 
 
 himself, knowing or suspecting that the Church 
 established by Christ proposes something else 
 to him ; secondarily, that without the means of 
 salvation placed in the Church by Christ, salva- 
 tion is extremely difficult. And it would be 
 even more difficult probably than it actually is, 
 were it not that to those who are without any 
 fault of their own deprived of these means of 
 salvation, God in His mercy makes the combat 
 somewhat easier, as it would seem; taking 
 away from such, perhaps, some of the tempta- 
 tions to which they might otherwise be ex- 
 posed, or, as we may say, tempering the wind 
 to the shorn lamb.'* For He ''will have all 
 men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge 
 of the truth (I. Tim. ii. 4), at least so far as 
 it is morally possible for them. 
 
 There is another article in this preamble 
 which is likely to give difficulty ; that in which 
 it is said, I am ready to observe all she com- 
 mands me.'' To the consideration of this wc 
 wlU devote a separate chapter. 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THB PREC^Pl^S OF THB CHURCH. 
 S you read the words just mentioned, '"^I 
 
 ZjL am ready to observe all she commands 
 me/' I should not be at all surprised if they 
 suggested most unpleasant ideas. They really 
 must seem, to one having the usual prejudices 
 against the Church, to mean that every Catholic 
 must be ready to undertake any duty which it 
 may please the Pope, or the bishop, or any one 
 else who is his lord and master, to assign him 
 to. He might be required, for instance, to 
 blow up the Capitol or the White House, or 
 to poison his own father or mother ; very well, 
 if the Church commands this, these words 
 would seem to settle the question. He would 
 have, if we take them in the sense in which 
 they might easily be taken by Protestants, to 
 go right to work and do what he was told, with- 
 out any fuss or scruple. ^ , 
 
 But though this idea may seem natural 
 enough, in reality it is nothing but a mon- 
 strous bugbear. Catholics would be amused at 
 any such sense being taken from the dedara- 
 lion or promise of which we are speaking. For 
 wery Catholic man knows that there is no such 
 
 i9» 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 199 
 
 personal authority which issues special com- 
 mands to him. The priest of his own parish is 
 the nearest approach to such an authority ; but 
 whatever commands he has to give are given 
 out in public in the church, and are simply in- 
 structions or requests to join in some good work 
 which is on foot, in which every one should help 
 according to his opportunities. 
 
 You will, however, say that at least the 
 priest gives injunctions of a personal character 
 in the confessional. This is true, of course. 
 But the commands or directions there given 
 have reference only to the good of the soul of 
 the penitent ; they are either to the effect that 
 he must give up his sins, or the occasions of 
 sin — that is to say, the places, persons, or occu- 
 pations which are causes of sin to him ; or they 
 are the prescribing to him of certain prayers or 
 pious works by way of what we call penance, 
 to be offered up in atonement or satisfaction for 
 sins, according to what has been said in the 
 previous chapter on purgatory. 
 
 Now, I know all this may be very different 
 from your idea of the relation between priest 
 and people. You are accustomed to regard the 
 people as being what Protestants call * * priest- 
 ridden.'' The fact is that it is really the other 
 way. The people are not priest-ridden, but the 
 priest is people-ridden. He is, if he hav§ any 
 ?§la);ipa§ with the p§opl§ at all, pr§tty mugh s$ 
 
200 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 their beck and call, without any time he can 
 call his own; it is they who are issuing their 
 commands to him, to go on this or that sick- 
 call, to hear and advisp tJiem in their troubles or 
 in their business, to baptize their children, or to 
 hear their confessions. The priest, especially 
 in any large city parish, is really the slave of 
 the people ; bound to attend to the interests of 
 each and every one of them at all hours of the 
 day and night, and getting in return a salary 
 which only just suffices for his maintenance, 
 and which no man, even though unmarried^ 
 like the priest, would think of working for if 
 he had the ability and education which a priest 
 necessarily must have. 
 
 This is really the whole fact of the matter in 
 a nutshell. But it is a simple matter of fact, 
 not deducible from any principle ; it might be 
 the other way, and probably would be the other 
 way were the Church not a divine institution, 
 animated and operated by the Spirit of God, 
 which can and does inspire man to make sacri- 
 fices which he could not make naturally. To 
 prove, then, that it is a fact, I can only give 
 you my own testimony, which is also that of 
 others who know what the state of the case is. 
 And I do not say that there have not been, or 
 that there are not now exceptions to what I 
 have given as a rule. Sometimes a priest, in 
 spite of his holy calling, may be worldly ; and 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 201 
 
 lie may be ambitious and tyrannical ; and if he 
 wishes to be so, he has some opportunity, on 
 account of the love and respect which good 
 Catholics have for the priesthood, though he 
 cannot carry such conduct far without correc- 
 tion from his bishop. But that in any case, by 
 his own authority or that of his superiors, he 
 issues special orders to the laity, employing 
 them either individually or collectively in the 
 nefarious schemes which exist only in the 
 Protestant imagination, is utterly untrue and 
 i|bsurd. 
 
 But the matter muse, as I have said, rest on 
 testimony. If you will not take that, it can be 
 settled in no other way except by your coming 
 into the Church yourself, and seeing for your- 
 self how things are. So, having done all I can 
 to remove this false impression, I will proceed 
 to give you the true meaning of these words in 
 the profession of .which we are speaking. It 
 may be observed, however, that they do not re- 
 quire the convert to do all that the priest tells 
 him, but only what the Church itself tells him ; 
 so if you are not sure, after all, that what I 
 have said is correct, there is at least this to fall 
 back on. 
 
 Now, then ; what does the Church command 
 us ? Only a very few and simple things. They 
 are commonly called by Catholics the ' ' precepts 
 of the Church/' »nd they are as follows : 
 
202 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 1. To hear Mass on Sundays, and all holy- 
 days of obligation. 
 
 2. To fast and abstain on the days com- 
 manded. 
 
 3. To confess our sins at least once a year. 
 
 4. To receive the blessed Eucharist at 
 Easter. 
 
 5. To contribute to the support of our 
 pastors. 
 
 6. Not to solemnize marriage at the forbidden 
 times ; nor to marry persons within the forbid- 
 den degrees of kindred, or otherwise prohibited 
 by the Church ; nor clandestinely. 
 
 A short explanation of these precepts will 
 now be in order. i. The first regards the 
 sanctification of Sundays and holy days. It is 
 a fixing with precision of the matter com- 
 manded in the Decalogue. As the command- 
 ment stands there, it is, Remember that thou 
 keep holy the Sabbath day.*' The manner of 
 keeping the Sabbath holy among the Israelites 
 was principally by abstaining from work. Be- 
 sides the Sabbaths, other holy times were desig- 
 nated by Moses (Lev. xxiii.), namely, the 
 phase, pasch or passover, the day of atone- 
 ment, and the feast of tabernacles. To these 
 others were subsequently added by the Jewish 
 Church or Synagogue ; and besides the abstain- 
 ing from work, sacrifices and other religious 
 pbservanceis were enjoined. 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 203 
 
 Now, the precise times to be sanctified and 
 the manner of the sanctification have evidently 
 been much changed in the New Dispensation. 
 One thing especially is manifest, that by the 
 general consent of almost all Christians, the first 
 day of the week is the one now to be kept holy, 
 not the seventh, as formerly. We observe Sun- 
 day as the day for worship and for rest, not Sat- 
 urday, as in the Old I^aw. Evidently, also, the 
 sacrifices enjoined by the Old Law are no 
 longer offered. It is clear, then, that unless 
 some great and horrible mistake has been made, 
 which can be hardly regarded as possible, these 
 changes have been made in accordance with the 
 will of God, and by competent autnority. This 
 authority Catholics believe to have been that of 
 the Church of Christ; and as nothing is re- 
 corded in the Scripture as having been distinct- 
 ly arranged by our I^ord Himself in the matter, 
 we are really obliged to rest our present observ- 
 ance practically on the word of the Church, as 
 contained either in distinct documents or in 
 ecclesiastical tradition. " ^ 
 
 V It is, then, somewhat strange that in the face 
 of these manifest changes, acquiesced in by 
 almost all Christians, Protestants should still 
 make so much* of the letter of the Old Testa- 
 ment with regard to this matter; that they 
 should call Sunday the Sabbath, and maintain 
 that everything regarding the Sabbath must 
 
204 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 now be observed on Sunday. And it is stranger 
 still that they should have added a tradition of 
 their own, forbidding any sort of recreation on 
 that day, when it is not recreation, but work, 
 that was prohibited in the Old Law. The nat- 
 ural meaning of work is something which is 
 laborious or tiresome ; if we stretch it farther 
 than that, we must, unless it can be interpreted 
 in some way for us, conclude that every move- 
 ment of the body or exercise of the mind is 
 work, and then the only thing left is to go to bed. 
 
 And we do not find in the Bible that even 
 religious observances of any kind are enjoined 
 on the Sabbath. It was evidently fitting that 
 there should be such, and such was the reason- 
 able interpretation made by the Jews of the law 
 of Moses ; but taking the letter of Scripture, as 
 they involve work, they also should have been 
 omitted. O ^ 
 
 The fact is, that the Church of the Old I,aw 
 construed and interpreted this commandment, 
 though it is clear that its interpretation, or at 
 least that of the Pharisees, was too strict, since 
 our lyord Himself disregarded and condemned it 
 in various instances, as in curing the sick on 
 the Sabbath day, and plucking and rubbing the 
 ears of corn (Luke vi. i). It also, as we have 
 seen, instituted new holydays (Judith xvi. 
 31, Esther ix. 57-28, I. Machabees iv. 59). 
 Though the record of these is not in all cases 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 205 
 
 in what you would accept as the Word of God, 
 still it is unquestioned history; the last feast, 
 moreover, is mentioned in the New Testament 
 (John X. 22). 
 
 If, then, the Church of the Old Law had and 
 exercised these powers without reproof except 
 for a too strict and rigorous interpretation, why 
 should not that of the New Law have a similar 
 authority ? 
 
 It has simply followed in the footsteps of the 
 Synagogue in its action. The greatest change, 
 or new departure, was in the substitution of 
 Sunday for Saturday, in honor of the Resurrec- 
 tion of Christ, intimated (John xx. 19, and Acts 
 XX. 7, I. Cor. xvi. 2), and adopted by Christians 
 generally. It has definitely formulated the way 
 of observance of Sunday, or given us the com- 
 mands of Christ in this respect not recorded in 
 the Bible ; and if its regulations as to this mat- 
 ter are not binding on us, nothing is, as those 
 of the law of Moses have necessarily disap- 
 peared with the change of the day. It has 
 established new feasts in honor of the principal 
 events and mysteries of our Redemption, as the 
 Synagogue of the Jews did for the principal 
 events of God's providence toward them. What 
 reasonable objection can be made to all this ? 
 
 It is now time to see just what the Church 
 does prescribe concerning Sundays and holy- 
 dliys; 
 
206 The Precepts of the CkurcL 
 
 First, as given above, the attendance at Mass 
 on these days. The Mass, as has been ex- 
 plained, is the great service of the Church ; it 
 is eminently fitting and proper that this should 
 be one selected as of obligation. This is all 
 that is absolutely required in the way of wor- 
 ship on these days ; it is, however, the desire 
 of the Church that Catholics should spend the 
 rest of the day in a pious and religious manner ; 
 and particularly that they should also attend 
 the afternoon or evening service known as 
 Vespers. ^ But experience shows that more 
 than the attendance at Mass cannot be pru- 
 dently commanded under pain of sin. 
 
 How, then, is the rest of the day to be spent ? 
 In the first place, servile work is to be avoided. 
 By this is meant fatiguing labor of the body, 
 such as most men have to perform during the 
 week to procure their daily bread. Mental 
 work, such as reading or writing, is not forbid- 
 den ; neither is artistic or scientific occupation ; 
 and it is immaterial whether compensation is 
 or is not expected for what is done. But one is 
 not allowed to do servile work for satisfaction, 
 for exercise, or to pass away the time ; this is 
 as much forbidden as that done for pay would 
 be. Recreation or play, if it be innocent, is 
 allowed; but it should not be such as would 
 interfere with the public worship of God, or 
 with the peace of those who wish to spend the 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 207 
 
 .- ' R ' J J ! - ' ■ . , . 
 
 day in prayer or quiet ; nor should it be such as 
 would produce excitement or fatigue. The 
 Church is always opposed to noisy and excit- 
 ing festivities, particularly on Sunday, and of 
 course to intoxication, debauchery, or any 
 amusement which would probably be an occa- 
 sion of sin. All these latter things would be 
 wrong on any day, but especially on a day 
 which should be spent in a closer union with 
 God. 
 
 Work, however, required by necessity, piety, 
 or charity is allowed ; such as the cooking of 
 food, the daily care of the house, preparation 
 for public worship, attendance on the sick, etc. 
 It is unavoidable also that some should work iu 
 order that others should be able to go from 
 place to place for reasonable recreation or neces- 
 sary business ; and also, some must do so be- 
 cause the work in which they are engaged is 
 of a character that cannot be altogetVier sus- 
 pended, as the care of furnaces which cannot, 
 without great loss, be allowed to go out. And 
 no one is obliged to suspend work if by so 
 doing he would lose his occupation and have 
 to starve. It is a misfortune that such should 
 be the case with any one ; but as things actual- 
 ly are it evidently cannot be helped. 
 
 Of course, excuse for one's regular work on 
 holydays other than Sundays is much more 
 common, as abstinence from it| unless the 
 
208 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 country were all Catholic, would be probably 
 attended by danger of losing one's occupation 
 altogether. All are expected, however, to hear 
 Mass on those days, if a Mass is provided at an 
 hour at which they can be present without 
 great inconvenience. And no one should do 
 servile work voluntarily or unnecessarily on 
 those days any more than on Sunday. 
 
 In this country there are only a few such 
 days through the year ; namely : 
 
 1. New Year's day. 
 
 2. Feast of the Ascension of our I^ord. 
 
 3. Feast of the Assumption of the B. V. 
 (August 15). 
 
 4. Feast of All Saints (November i). 
 
 5. Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the 
 B. V. (December 8). 
 
 6. Christmas Day. 
 
 The first and last of these are pretty generally 
 recognized as public holidays. The addition 
 of the four others to the fifty-two Sundays of the 
 year makes really very little difference. 
 
 2. The second precept of the Church con- 
 cerns fasting and abstinence. These are two 
 different things, though often confounded, even 
 by Catholics. 
 
 By abstinence'' is meant abstaining from 
 flesh meat. All the world knows that the 
 regular practice of good Catholics is to abstain 
 from meat on every Friday. The only except . 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 209 
 
 tion to this is when Christmas falls on that day 
 of the week. This Friday abstinence is of 
 course, in commemoration of the death of 
 Christ, which occurred on that day. It is 
 manifestly fitting that Christians should under- 
 go some suflfering on the day on which Christ's 
 great sufferings were endured. 
 
 Protestants are not usually inclined to admit 
 this, however, alleging that it is useless, super- 
 stitious, and presumptuous for us to afflict our- 
 selves in this way, and that it derogates from 
 the dignity of our Saviour to have us put our- 
 selves in His place in this way. This at least 
 seems to be their idea in opposing it. But in 
 this they are contradicted by Christ Himself; 
 His words are given in Matt. ix. 15, Mark ii. 
 20, lyuke V. 35. When He was asked how it 
 was that His disciples did not fast as the Jews 
 did, He said that as long as they had the bride- 
 groom (that is, evidently. Himself) with them, 
 they could not fast ; but that the days will come 
 when the bridegroom shall be taken away from 
 them and that then they shall fast. And such 
 was actually the case from the earliest ages of 
 the Church. Afflicting the body by deprivar 
 tion of food and other means is no modern in- 
 vention; on the contrary, it was- practised 
 much more in the beginning of the Church 
 than now. St. Paul bears witness to this 
 most clearly when he says (I. Cor. ix. 25-27): 
 
210 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 ** Every one that striveth for the mastery re^ 
 fraineth himself from all things, and they in- 
 deed that they may receive a corruptible crown, 
 but we an incorruptible one. I therefore so 
 run, not as at an uncertainty : I so fight, not as 
 one beating the air. But I chastise my body, 
 and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps, when 
 I have preached to others, I myself should be- 
 come a castaway.'* 
 
 In these words of St. Paul we see the idea of 
 what Catholics call bodily mortification. It is 
 different from that of penance or satisfaction, of 
 which I have already treated. It is this : that 
 most of our temptations to evil come from the 
 lusts or desires of the body ; that our sensual 
 appetites rise up in rebellion against what our 
 souls know to be right and reasonable. The 
 body endeavors, so to speak, to assume the 
 mastery over the soul, and too often succeeds, 
 as, for example, in the lamentable case of the 
 habitual drunkard. It must be compelled, 
 therefore, to take its proper place, as the ser- 
 vant, not the master, of the soul ; and the only 
 real way to do this is to deprive it of even what 
 it might lawfully have. The experience of 
 man shows that unless the body is sometimes 
 deprived of lawful enjoyments, the soul will not 
 be able to refuse it unlawful ones. It must be 
 accustomed to obey simply for obedience's sake. 
 
 Those Christians who have a strong desire 
 
The Precepts of the Church. AI I 
 
 for God, and wish to pass much of their time id 
 prayer and union with Him, find this mortifica- 
 tion necessary in a higher degree than th^ 
 Church requires it to be practised. For the 
 body, even though kept in reasonable subjec- 
 tion, is still with its various needs and demands 
 a burden and a distraction to the soul, and the 
 more these bodily needs can be lessened the 
 better. The soul gains at the expense of the 
 body. Holy men at all times have found that 
 by treating the body with great severity its de- 
 mands can be much lessened, and it can be 
 made indifferent to many things it naturally 
 craves ; its tastes and its daintiness can be over- 
 come, and the soul be thus freed to a great ex- 
 tent from attending to its wants. 
 
 We may put the matter in another, and 
 really a more correct way. For after all it is 
 not the body of itself and alone that desires 
 satisfaction or pleasure ; it is the soul which 
 desires bodily pleasure, and often prefers it to 
 that which is higher and better. By resolutely 
 turning from the lower pleasure the soul is 
 weaned from it, and the appetite and desire for 
 the higher is strengthened in it. The soul 
 must have something to desire ; and the more 
 it turns from the world and its pleasures, 
 whether bodily or otherwise, the more it desires 
 those things which the world cannot give or 
 take away ; the less it seeks the creature for its 
 
212 The Precepts of the Church 
 
 own sake, the more will it seek the Creator. 
 This is the underlying principle of all mortifica- 
 tion, which may be applied to riches and honors 
 as well as to bodily needs. 
 
 But to resume our explanation of the particu- 
 lar precept of the Church of which I am treat- 
 ing. By fasting** is meant in general the 
 deprivation not of some particular kind of food, 
 like meat, but the taking less food than the 
 appetite craves. As specially formulated by 
 the Church, it is the restricting ourselves to one 
 full meal, instead of taking three in the day^ 
 In the strict rule of the fast, no breakfast or 
 supper is allowed ; this, however, has been so 
 far relaxed as to permit a supper of eight ounces 
 weight, and a cup of coffee or tea with twa 
 ounces of bread in the morning. The fast also 
 properly includes abstinence from meat; but 
 in lycnt dispensation is generally given for 
 meat several times a week at dinner. 
 
 Those who are sick, or who have to work 
 hard, those under twenty-one or over sixty 
 years of age, and some others, are excused from 
 fasting ; excuse from abstinence is much more 
 diifficult, as this can generally be observed with- 
 out detriment to health or unfitting one for 
 work. 
 
 3-4. **To confess our sins at least once a 
 year** ; this is the third precept of the Church. 
 More frequent confession th^n tUi^ r^coip- 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 213 
 
 mended by the Church, but yearly confession 
 is required by this positive command ; so that 
 one who has committed grievous sin, and passes 
 over this time without confession, which must 
 of course also be accompanied by repentance, 
 commits a distinct sin by this, in addition to 
 those which may already be on his soul. As, 
 however, confession is usually followed by Holy 
 Communion, this and the following precept, 
 that of receiving the Eucharist at Easter, prac- 
 tically fall into one, that of making what we 
 call the Easter duty. The precept, as you see 
 it here, reads **at Easter**; but as it would 
 be impossible for all to receive Communion on 
 that exact day, the time is extended, according 
 to the regular law of the Church, a week on 
 each side ; in this country we have a still fur- 
 ther extension, namely, from the first Sunday 
 in lycnt, six weeks before Easter, to Trinity 
 Sunday, eight weeks after Easter ; so that a 
 time of fourteen weeks, or more than a quarter 
 of the year, is allowed here for this duty. 
 Every Catholic of an age to receive Communion 
 must receive at some time during this period, 
 no matter how often he may have done so at 
 other times during the year that has passed. 
 
 I say * * every Catholic of an age to receive 
 Communion * * ; and here it will be well to say 
 a word to remove a false impression that Prot- 
 estants naturally have. With them only cer- 
 
214 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 tain persons, perhaps a small proportion of the 
 congregation, are communicants ; but with us 
 it is not so. Every Catholic is, by the right of 
 his or her baptism, usually received in infancy, 
 a communicant ; and is expected to make his 
 or her first Communion in childhood, usually at 
 about the age of ten or eleven, and to receive 
 regularly after that ; once a month is what is 
 expected. 
 
 Many, however, do not receive as often as 
 that, especially after they have been thrown 
 into the temptations and distractions of the 
 world; neither, of course, do they go to con- 
 fession. And too often we find Catholics who 
 neglect even the yearly Easter duty of which 
 these commandments treat, and that year after 
 year. Protestants do not seem to understand 
 this ; they take for granted that every Catholic 
 goes to confession regularly, and then ask how 
 is it that they confess their sins and still go on 
 committing such grievous ones as, of course, all 
 know that some Catholics, as well as others, do 
 commit. They seem to think that a drunkard, 
 a thief, or one living in evident impurity, if he 
 be a CatholiCj goes to confession just as assidu- 
 ously as any one else. In fact, such a proceed- 
 ing would be almost unheard of. Any Catholic 
 living in sin which he has not really made up 
 his mind to abandon would not get absolution 
 if he did go to confession, unless he imposed on 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 115 
 
 the priest by a pretended repentance ; and such 
 hypocrisy is very rare, for Catholics have a 
 horror of making a bad confession or Com- 
 munion. Of course there are some who are 
 really struggling against sin, who do go to 
 these sacraments with some frequency ; but 
 next to none go with a conscious purpose to re- 
 main just as they are. 
 
 That many should keep their faith, and re- 
 main in the Church, though making no attempt 
 to lead a Christian life, was distinctly predicted 
 by our Lord, in the parables of the wheat and 
 cockle or tares, and the net cast into the sea, 
 gathering together all kinds of fish, both good 
 and bad, which are recorded in the thirteenth 
 chapter of St. Matthew's gospel. Attempts to 
 found or carry on a church consisting only of 
 good people can only result in hypocrisy. 
 
 Please, then, before you blame on the Church 
 the scandalous conduct of any Catholic, find 
 out whether he goes to the sacraments regu- 
 larly or not. 
 
 5. *'To contribute to the support of our 
 pastors'* is the fifth precept. It is plain that 
 the clergy must be supported in some way, as 
 they are not allowed to undertake any business 
 which can supply them with an income. In 
 Catholic countries they are sometimes paid by 
 the State, which, of course, makes them really 
 supported by the people; but in this state of 
 
2l6 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 things there is no special application of this 
 precept to the conscience of the individual 
 Christian, as he will be obliged to do his share 
 without thinking of it. But I need hardly say 
 that here there is no such provision, and it is 
 probably best that there should be none. Its 
 place is supplied by the collections taken up in 
 church. These collections and the rents paid 
 for seats have, however, also another object, 
 that of providing for the ordinary running ex- 
 penses of the church, or other undertakings 
 connected with it, such as the parochial school. 
 Ever}'^ one is evidently bound in conscience to 
 contribute to these collections, whether ordinary 
 or special ; both on account of justice, for no 
 one can have a right to occupy a seat paid for 
 with other people *s money, and also on account 
 of charity, for every Catholic is, of course, 
 bound in this way to help on the good work of 
 the church generally, though some part of it 
 may be of no immediate benefit to himself. 
 
 A great deal of nonsense is often talked 
 about priests being grasping and avaricious, 
 about their always talking about money, etc. 
 It is perfectly plain to any one who knows any- 
 thing about the matter, that priests do not want 
 the money for which they ask for themselves, 
 but for the work of the church. They are not 
 obliged to carry this on by their own private 
 means, even if they were able to do so ; but as 
 
The Precepts of the Church, 
 
 217 
 
 a rule they have no such private means, for 
 priests seldom come from rich families. The 
 people must then furnish them with the money 
 required for the expenses of the church and of 
 the diocese, also that which is needed for the 
 poor and for charitable institutions, and for 
 foreign missions ; to say nothing of what is re- 
 quired for the building of churches and schools, 
 or other extraordinary expenses. People gen- 
 erally hardly realize how great these expenses 
 altogether are, and fail grievously in respect of 
 this precept, which, after all, is not so much a 
 precept of the Church as an obligation coming 
 from the very nature of the case. Putting a few 
 pennies on the plate of a Sunday, which is all 
 that some people in comfortable circumstances 
 do, is very far from being a fulfilment of this 
 obligation ; to do no more than that is certainly 
 for such a grievous sin of omission. 
 
 It is true, however, that this commandment 
 is, to some extent, complied with by the offer- 
 ings which are customarily made on the occa- 
 sion of baptisms and marriages. These are not 
 required by the priest as a condition of perform- 
 ing the ceremony ; still, they cannot be con- 
 sidered as simply voluntary, as without them 
 the revenue of the church would not be suffi- 
 cient. 
 
 6. The last precept concerns the matter 
 of marriage. By ** solemnizing marriage'* is 
 
2l8 
 
 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 meant having what is called a ** nuptial mass,'* 
 or indulging in notable festivity or display on 
 the occasion; marriage itself is not absolutely 
 forbidden at the times which are proscribed, 
 though the custom ^of Catholics is not to entei 
 on it at these times without a grave reason 
 The times are from the beginning of Advent to 
 the feast of the Epiphany (Jan. 6), and from the 
 beginning of Lent to one week after Easter. 
 
 With regard to the degrees of kindred, the 
 Church forbids marriage between people as 
 nearly related as what are called third cousins. 
 It also has established other prohibitions to ex- 
 plain which would occupy too much space, and 
 also probably lead to misunderstanding; the 
 only safe way for parties intending marriage is 
 to notify the priest in time, in order that he 
 may examine into the special circumstances of 
 the case. In most of the cases in which mar- 
 riage is prohibited, it is also dbnsidered invalid 
 by the Church ; so that the matter is evidently 
 one of the greatest importance. 
 
 What is meant by marrying clandestinely is 
 being married by any otlier person than the 
 priest of the parish to which the parties belong ; 
 two witnesses are also required, that the mar- 
 riage be not clandestine. 
 
 Now here, you ^ee, we have what is meant 
 by being ready to observe all that the Church 
 commands me/* These precepts or regulations 
 
The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 219 
 
 which have been given are evidently only such 
 as would be expected to be made by any organ- 
 ization of which one is a member ; they do not 
 compare in number with those made by the 
 State, which are generally submitted to without 
 a murmur. And, as you see, there is nothing 
 of a personal character about them; they 
 bear equally on all, with due regard to the 
 different circumstances of individuals. They 
 are simply laws, such as any well-ordered com- 
 munity must have ; and the wonder is not that 
 they exist, but that they are. so few and easy. " 
 
 In this matter, of course, I am speaking of 
 the obligations of the laity. The clergy are 
 under much more strict control. Not only are 
 there many laws specially for them, restricting 
 their freedom of action, but they are also sub- 
 ject to personal direction from superiors, from 
 which the laity are practically exempt. This 
 is evidently necessary for the proper discharge 
 of their special duties ; but it is a matter which 
 need not concern any one else ; and no one can 
 enlist in their ranks without knowing the obli- 
 gations which he is incurring. 
 
 But it should be distinctly understobd, that 
 both laws and precepts made by superiors of 
 any kind, either in the Church, the State, or 
 family, do not bind when they are evidently con- 
 trary to the dictates of conscience. And it 
 must also be remembered that the Church does 
 
220 The Precepts of the Church. 
 
 not claim infallibility for herself or for the Pope 
 in matters of law, precept, or government gen- 
 erally, but only in formal decisions concerning 
 faith and morals. So that if — though it is 
 really a practically impossible supposition — the 
 Pope were to order any Catholic to commit 
 murder or any other crime, the command would 
 not be considered as having any binding force, 
 but would rather be an evidence of insanity on 
 the part of him that would issue such an order. 
 And the same would, of course, also apply to 
 any bishop, or superior in a religious order, 
 issuing such commands to his subjects. No 
 one would think for a moment that any obliga- 
 tion was attached to them. 
 
 I think we have now discussed all the princi- 
 pal matters requiring explanation in the pro- 
 fession of faith which has made our text. As, 
 however, there are other points which give dif- 
 ficulty to many, and occasion of criticism or of 
 objection to the Church, it will be well to 
 devote some space to the consideration of at 
 least the morg jpromineut of these. 
 
CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 INDUI.GKNCKS AND DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 IT is probable that there is among Protestants 
 a more obstinate — for I really must say so 
 — and a more complete misunderstanding on the 
 point of Catholic doctrine named first in the 
 head of this chapter, than on any other. I say 
 obstinate" ; for the truth on this point has 
 been stated so repeatedly that it. seems impossi- 
 ble that it should not have been, at least to a 
 great extent, accepted in the Protestant world 
 by this time, had it not been for a firm deter- 
 mination not to accept it, and to regard us as 
 either deceivers or deceived regarding it. We 
 find the word * ' indulgence ' ' continually under- 
 stood by Protestant Christians, and even stated 
 in their books, as being a permission to commit 
 sin. In itself this misunderstanding may not 
 be so extraordinary or unnatural ; for indul- 
 gence, in the common English sense, certainly 
 does often mean an allowance or permission to 
 do some things which would otherwise be 
 against the rules. We generally mean by an 
 indulgent " father, for instance, one who does 
 not keep a very tight rein on his children, but 
 allows them to do various things which a more 
 
 321 
 
222 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 strict one would forbid. And we also mean by 
 * ' indulging * ' ourselves, allowing ourselves 
 pleasures which, if we were very conscien- 
 tious, we should avoid. When we indulge 
 ourselves, it is understood that we turn aside 
 somewhat from the path of duty. 
 
 But the word indulgence has another sense, 
 too. A father would also be called indulgent 
 if he, while making strict rules for his children, 
 and appointing punishments for their infrac- 
 tion, should be moved by compassion for the 
 children so as to remit some portion of these 
 punishments, and try to correct their faults by 
 love and kindness rather than by fear and 
 severity. 
 
 Now, this latter is the idea attached to the 
 vrord indulgence, in the sense in which it is 
 used by the Church. 
 
 To understand it more clearly let us look 
 into the facts of history. 
 
 In the early days of the Christian Church 
 severe penalties were appointed for those who 
 fell into grievous sins, especially when those 
 sins were public and scandalous. Of course, 
 these penalties or penances could only be in- 
 flicted after the repentance of those who had 
 sinned ; for while still continuing in their sin 
 they would not submit to them. The most 
 common ones were in the way of fasting, which 
 might continue with more or less strictness for 
 
Indulgences and Dispensations, 223 
 
 years. A long time also intervened in some 
 cases before the offenders could be restored to 
 the full communion of the Church ; and they 
 were required to remain also in a separate place 
 by the door at public service. It is hardly 
 necessary to go into details concerning this 
 matter ; still a few examples may be given to 
 show the rigor of this ancient discipline. Its 
 rules were too numerous for us to do more than 
 take a specimen here and there. 
 
 1 . If any one shall do any servile work on a 
 Sunday or holy day, he shall do penance three 
 days on bread and water. 
 
 2. He who breaks the fast in Lent, for each 
 day shall do penance for seven days. 
 
 3. He wh6 curses his parents, shall be peni- 
 tent forty days on bread and water. 
 
 4. An usurer, three years, one on bread and 
 water. 
 
 5. An adulterer, five to twelve years, accord- 
 ing to circumstances. 
 
 6. A mother guilty of infanticide, twelve 
 years. 
 
 7.. If any one shall swear falsely through 
 avarice, he shall sell all his goods and give the 
 price to the poor ; and entering a monastery, do 
 penance all his life. 
 
 Of course these were different in different 
 parts of the Church, and at diflferent times. 
 
 As time went on, and the fervor of the faith- 
 
224 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 ful became somewhat relaxed with the greater 
 prosperity of the Church, it was found impossi- 
 ble to get these severe penances performed, and 
 it became evident that if they were still insisted 
 on, the effect would be to prevent repentance 
 rather than to insure its being thorough and 
 sincere ; so, naturally, a true zeal for the salva- 
 tion of souls required a reduction of their rigor, 
 and that for them some easier works of penance 
 should be substituted. This substitution of the 
 easier for the more difl&cult was known by the 
 name of an indulgence. At the present day it 
 is found impracticable to enjoin much penance 
 beyond what the second precept of the Church, 
 which has just been explained, requires, except 
 to those who are exceptionally pious and fer- 
 vent; so that the prayers and works which 
 have taken the place of the old canonical pen- 
 ances, and which are now called indulgences or 
 indulgenced prayers and devotions, are, as a 
 rule, very easily performed. ' 
 
 They are divided into two classes, plenary 
 and partial. The plenary indulgence is at- 
 tached to certain works, usually somewhat con- 
 siderable, though no more than can be per- 
 formed by any one really anxious to satisfy for 
 his sins, and is understood as making such 
 works an equivalent for all that ought to be 
 done in that way ; the partial, to works or 
 prayers less in amount. Partial indulgences 
 
Indulgences and Dispensations. 225 
 
 are given as covering a certain space of time, 
 as a year, forty days, and the like ; by this it 
 is meant that they are substituted for the canon- 
 ical penance which would formerly have been 
 assigned ibr that length of time. 
 
 Now, one thing about this matter must be 
 specially noted. As with the old penances, re- 
 pentance is supposed to precede. Every Cath- 
 olic knows perfectly well that it is of no use to 
 try to get an indulgence while he is in the state 
 of mortal sin ; if he be in that state, he must go 
 to confession first, and get into the state of 
 grace and friendship with God by a hearty re- 
 pentance and a real abandonment of his bad 
 life; then, if there be any indulgence to be 
 had, as usually happens at the time of a mis- 
 sion, for instance, lie may hope to get the bene- 
 fit of it, to satisfy, to some extent at least, for 
 the temporal punishnient still remaining for his 
 sins. 
 
 But, as a general thing, it is only pious and 
 good people, who go to the Sacraments regular- 
 ly, who make any effort to get indulgences, un- 
 less on special occasions like that mentioned 
 above. These good people have long ago re- 
 pented of their sins, if indeed they ever had any 
 mortal sins to repent of; at the same time, they 
 have not the courage, or perhaps the strength, 
 to undertake any severe penitential works ; m 
 they try to get the benefit of these commuta- 
 
226 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 tions for the penance which their more heroic 
 ancestors used to do, and which some do even 
 now. 
 
 Now, you notice that this whole doctrine im- 
 plies a special efl&cacy in the way of satisfaction 
 for forgiven sin, attached not merely to peni- 
 tential works in general, but particularly to 
 those appointed, and blessed, as it were, by the 
 Church. As the old canonical penances were 
 regarded as more salutary than anything T^ne 
 could do of one's own accord, so these which 
 are substituted for them have a like value. 
 And it is also plain that, in theory, a work or 
 prayer to which an indulgence of a hundred 
 days is attached is the equivalent of the old 
 penance performed for that time ; but as it is 
 confessed that the actual benefit derived from 
 this indulgencedwork or prayer depends largely 
 on the fervor with which it is done or said, it is 
 plain that this actual benefit of an indulgence 
 is likely to be less than that of the old penance ; 
 for to perform the penance required of itself a 
 good deal of fervor, while to perform the work 
 to which the indulgence is attached requires of 
 necessity very little. All devout Catholics in- 
 stinctively feel this, and therefore most of them, 
 instead of being contented with one plenary 
 indulgence, or a few partial ones, try to gain as 
 many as they conveniently can. 
 
 Now, of course I am aware that objections 
 
Indulgences and Dispensations, 227 
 
 may be raised against the whole doctrine of 
 temporal punishnient for venial or for forgiven 
 mortal sin, and also against the Church having^ 
 the power of making any special form of such 
 satisfaction specially salutary ; but the main 
 point about the matter of which we are now 
 treating is that the whole doctrine of indul- 
 gences has reference to this matter of satisfac- 
 tion, and that the idea of their being permis- 
 sions to commit sin is something which never 
 occurs to a Catholic at all. It is simply a 
 monstrous delusion which Protestants have 
 somehow got into ; one which would indeed 
 be ludicrous, were not the prejudice against the 
 Church which it has created so lamentable. -"^ 
 
 It is hard, I know, for a Protestant to give 
 up this, perhaps, his greatest charge against 
 the Church ; the one which he has seen over 
 and over again stated as an historical fact, 
 especially in connection with the Reformation. 
 That Tetzel was selling permissions to commit 
 sin, the price being a contribution to the build- 
 ing of St. Peter's Church, is something he feels 
 as certain of as that Christ lived and died. 
 But the fact about that matter was merely that 
 Tetzel had authority to collect money for St. ^ 
 Peter's, as one might have nowadays for any 
 church, the building of the church and the 
 contributing to it being regarded, undoubtedly, 
 as a good work ; and that to this good work the 
 
228 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 Holy See attached an indulgence — that is, it 
 substituted this good work for the canonical 
 penances, in the way that has been described. 
 But, of course, no Catholic knowing his reli- 
 gion supposed that it would do any good in 
 that way to ^ny one who intended to commit 
 grievous sin, or to any one who had not sin- 
 cerely repented of all the grievous sins he had 
 committed, and abandoned them for good. 
 
 So much, then, for this monstrous and almost 
 inconceivable misrepresentation. The only way 
 of justifying or accounting for it is, that at the 
 time of the Reformation the matter of preach- 
 ing and explaining the faith and practice of the 
 Church had been somewhat neglected, so that 
 many Catholics were ignorant, in a great 
 measure, of what the Church taught; and 
 though it is hard to believe that Luther, priest 
 as he was, was among this number, still many 
 could easily be persuaded, because they had 
 not received much Catholic instruction, that an 
 indulgence was something like what Protestants 
 now imagine it to be. Still, it is not probable 
 that this error took much hold in the beginning 
 of the Reformation ; but as people got more and 
 more separated from the Church, and out of 
 reach of its voice, the false idea developed and 
 took firm hold of their minds. 
 
 And now a few words about a kindred sub- 
 ject, one often confused with the one of which I 
 
Indulgences and Dispensations, 220 
 
 have been treating. I mean the matter of dis- 
 pensations, so called. 
 
 What is a dispensation ? It is a relaxation 
 of a law made by the Church, for some reason 
 not sufficient in itself to excuse one from it. 
 For instance, a person not sick enough to be, 
 excused by the sickness itself from abstinence 
 on Friday, may be excused by the authorities 
 of the Church ; the law is dispensed or its 
 obligation removed in his particular case. Evi- 
 dently it is in the power of any law-giver to 
 release any one or more of his subjects from 
 a law which he has made ; as he made the law,- 
 so can he also unmake it. And he can give 
 permission to others, or delegate them, as we 
 say, to dispense in this way in his name. In 
 order, however, that a dispensation should be 
 lawfully given there must, as I have said, be 
 some reason for it, though not a reason enough 
 in itself to excuse ; also this dispensation should 
 not cause an undue burden to fall on others. 
 
 But, it is plain enough that though a law- 
 giver can dispense in his own law, he cannot 
 dispense in the eternal laws of God, or the 
 essential obligations of morality, for he did not 
 make or constitute these. Dispensations, there- 
 fore, are never given by the Church in matters 
 of morality ; but only in those things which of 
 themselves are indifferent, like that of absti- 
 nence on Friday, as mentioned above. Some 
 
^30 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 things, you see, are commanded because they 
 are essentially right and obligatory, or forbid- 
 den because they are essentially wrong. Others, 
 on the contrary, are obligatory simply because 
 they are commanded, or prohibited merely as 
 being against the law. As, for example, in 
 secular legislation, there is no obligation in it- 
 self to pay tariff duties until a law is made to 
 that effect, and one can walk freely over the 
 grass unless it is forbidden to do so by some 
 special regulation. It is in matters only of this 
 latter kind that the Church gives dispensations ; 
 where she makes a lav: for the general good, 
 which without her legislation would not be a 
 matter of obligation. But in matters of the 
 divine law she cannot interfere, except to inter- 
 pret it where doubt may exist. She cannot say 
 that any act is a sin against the divine law, and 
 then give permission or dispensation for it, and 
 she never does. If she could have done a thing 
 like that, she could have saved England to the 
 Church ; but she would not grant permission or 
 dispensation to Henry VIII. to marry Ann 
 Boleyn when he was truly married to Queen 
 Catherine; for both divorce and bigamy are 
 prohibited by the law of God. lyUther and his 
 companions were willing to strain a point to 
 please the Landgrave of Hesse, and subscribed 
 a document to that effect ; but the Catholic 
 Church cannot do such a thing. 
 
' Indulgences and Dispensations, 231 
 
 She will not allow the smallest thing, es- 
 sentially sinful— even, for instance, the most 
 trifling falsehood — for any consideration, how- 
 ever important. 
 
 Now one more matter, suggested by tnis, be- 
 fore we conclude this chapter. It is commonly 
 said by Protestants that we, and especially the 
 Jesuits, maintain that one may do evil that 
 good may come, or that the end sanctifies the 
 means. 
 
 It is curious that the same accusation was 
 made in the very beginning of Christianity. 
 St. Paul testifies to this : And not rather (as 
 we are slandered, and as some afl&rm that we 
 say) let us do evil, that there may come good? 
 (Rom. iii. 8). 
 
 When St. Paul condemned this doctrine you 
 believe that he meant what he said, I know. 
 You do not suppose him to be a Jesuit ; you do 
 not think that he maintains a thing which in 
 his heart he denies, as you perhaps believe the 
 Jesuits do. And yet you see he was accused 
 of this damnable doctrine, that the end sanc- 
 tifies or justifies the means. 
 
 Precisely the same is the case now. The 
 accusation made against us of holding this 
 doctrine is one for which there is not the slight- 
 est shadow of real foundation ; there is none 
 whatever in the formularies or decrees of the 
 Church, nor is there any in the writings of a 
 
232 Indulgences and Dispensations. 
 
 single Catholic theologian. On the contrary^ 
 Catholic writers on moral theology, in which 
 branch of science the question would occur, 
 unanimously reject it. The Jesuits, who have 
 given special attention to this science, do so 
 most explicitly. Such a doctrine is nevei 
 taught by any one in the Catholic Church pub- 
 licly or privately ; unless it might be by some 
 unlearned layman who had been made to be- 
 lieve by what Protestants say that such was the 
 Catholic teaching, and thought it his duty to 
 defend it as well as he could. No permission 
 would or could be given in the Church to com- 
 mit the smallest sin, even if the whole world 
 could be converted to the faith by it. 
 
 The only thing that could possibly be mis- 
 taken — and that only by great stupidity or in- 
 advertence — for such a doctrine is the common- 
 sense judgment of theologians, that if an action 
 has two results, one evil and one good, the evil 
 can be permitted for the sake of the good, if the 
 good is what is intended and is considerable 
 compared with the evil. As, for instance, a 
 military commander, engaged in a just war, 
 can shell a town occupied by the enemy, 
 though he knows that in all probability sonie 
 non-combatants, women or children, will be un- 
 avoidably and unintentionally killed. He does 
 not kill them as a means of killing the armed 
 enemy ; the latter is what he is trying to do, 
 
Confession, 
 
 233 
 
 the former happens simply because he cannot 
 help it. 
 
 Do not then, if you value truth or justice, 
 make this absurd charge against us. And now 
 let us go on to some other matters, where per- 
 haps there is more excuse for some misunder- 
 standing. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 CONFESSION. 
 
 I HAVE already had something to say about 
 the Catholic doctrine and practice of con- 
 fession and absolution when speaking of the 
 Sacraments, some time ago ; but as intimated 
 then, the subject is such a prominent one and 
 liable to so much misunderstanding, that it is 
 better to give it a more full explanation. 
 
 The Catholic belief about this matter is, that 
 all who commit mortal sins after baptism are 
 boXind by the law of God to confess these sins 
 to a priest ; and that this confession, or rather 
 the absolution which is usually given by the 
 priest after it, is the ordinary way in which sins 
 committed after baptism are forgiven. It is not 
 doubted, however, that they may be forgiven 
 without the ministry of the priest if the sinner 
 has what is called perfect contrition ; that is, a 
 true and hearty sorrow for sin purely for God's 
 
234 
 
 Confession, 
 
 sake^ joined, of course, with a firm purpose of 
 avoiding it for the future, and of doing every- 
 thing which God commands. But as the 
 Catholic firmly believes that God commands 
 confession for all sins after baptism, as has been 
 Siiid — and this whether the sins have been al- 
 ready forgiven or not — it is plain that he goes 
 to confession just the same in this case as in 
 any other. >:se O- 
 
 In most cases, however, it seems that the 
 sorrow felt for sin is hardly pure and perfect 
 enough to insure its forgiveness without abso- 
 lution. With absolution a lower and less per- 
 fect sorrow suffices ; but even in this case there 
 must be a true and genuine repentance founded 
 on motives of faith, such as the fear of punish- 
 ment in the next life, not on mere worldly con- 
 siderations. And there must be a real turning 
 from sin as such, so that the sinner would not 
 commit it, even though he should be told that 
 God would not punish him for future sins, or — 
 what is more practical and possible — that he 
 would certainly have -the grace of forgiveness 
 later on. One who truly repents of his sins in 
 a way to obtain forgiveness for them even with * 
 the help of the priest's absolution, must be so 
 disposed that he would not go on committing 
 them, even though he felt sure he would live 
 ten or twenty years longer. It is to be feared, 
 of course, that some who apparently repent and 
 
Confession. 
 
 235 
 
 confess their sins on their death-beds, or what 
 they believe to be such, are not in these dis- 
 positions, but are merely influenced by servile 
 fear, as it is called ; that they turn from sin not 
 because they hate it in any way, but simply and 
 solely because they dread its punishment ; that 
 they would send away the priest instantly if the 
 doctor told them they were sure to recover, and 
 not think of calling for him again till they 
 again seemed 'to be in a similar emergency. 
 Such, of course, are not forgiven even if the 
 priest gives them absolution, as he probably 
 will on the chance, however doubtful their dis- 
 positions may seem to be. 
 
 You see, then, that the dispositions of the sin- 
 ner must be satisfactory in God's sight when 
 he goes to confession, and that otherwise, ac- 
 cording to Catholic doctrine, he is not forgiven. 
 And I hope you see and believe what every 
 Catholic knows perfectly well, that it is not the 
 idea of confession simply to wash out an old 
 score of sins, and have a clean slate to start 
 with more on. Some Protestants imagine this ; 
 that the Catholic goes to confession simply to 
 report his sins, and have a suitable penance as- 
 signed which will make the matter all right 
 without further trouble. 
 
 And perhaps you imagine a still more 
 scandalous and outrageous thing yet ; namely, 
 that the penance is largely in the form of money 
 
236 
 
 Confession. 
 
 paid to the priest. It has even been said thai 
 we have a regular schedule of^sins, so much 
 being paid for the absolution of each. It is ths 
 same old idea as that about indulgences, except 
 that the money is supposed to be handed over 
 afterwards instead of beforehand. 
 
 It is simply utterly false. Nothing of the 
 kind exists ; indeed, it is in some dioceses ab- 
 solutely forbidden to receive money in the con- 
 fessional, though it may be due on some other 
 account. But as for paying for absolution, it is 
 a thing unheard of. There seems to be no es- 
 sential reason why a voluntary offering should 
 not* be made on the occasion of confession, as 
 well as on that of baptism or marriage ; but as 
 it would be likely to lead to some abuse and to 
 give scandal, to say nothing of discouraging 
 frequent reception of the Sacraments of Pen- 
 ance and the Eucharist, which the Church has 
 much at heart, no custom of the kind could be 
 tolerated. 
 
 No, hearing confessions is on natural grounds 
 a burden to the priest, and often quite a griev- 
 ous one. This of itself would suffice to show 
 that it is not a human invention, for there could 
 be no possible inducement to the priesthood to 
 institute a practice so full of labor, and putting 
 such a strain as this does on patience, except 
 the conviction that it was required by the la^ 
 of God. 
 
Confession. 
 
 23/ 
 
 Of course it has its consolations ; for if there 
 be joy before the angels of God upon one sin- 
 ner doing penance (or as your version has it, 
 '**one sinner that repenteth''; both mean ^he 
 same thing) (lyuke xv. 10), so the priest can-» 
 not but be moved to joy when he sees a sinner 
 turning to God ; and also he is edified and en- 
 couraged when he sees, as he often does, how 
 pure and free from sin, and how exalted in vir- 
 tue, many souls have become which have been 
 in this very sacrament repeatedly washed in the 
 blood of the I^amb. 
 
 One other mistake may be now mentioned ; 
 it has been already alluded to in what has been 
 said about the Pope. Some Protestants im- 
 agine that the priest himself does not go to con- 
 fession, or if he does, that he confesses to the 
 bishop, and the bishops to the Pope. This is 
 all nonsense. Priests go to confessioli far more 
 frequently than the average of the laity ; they 
 are expected to do so once a week, as they are 
 expected to receive Communion every day ; for 
 of course they receive when they say Mass, and 
 this they should do daily. And they go, as a 
 rule, to each other ; and the bishop would gen- 
 erally confess to a priest ; even the Pope, as has 
 been said, would do the same. 
 
 Another absurd idea prevails regarding this 
 matter; namely, on the notion just mentioned 
 of priests confessing to the bishop, etc o, it is 
 
^3^ 
 
 Confession. 
 
 supposed that they report what they hear in 
 confession to him, and he to the Pope. And 
 yet every one ought to know that the obligation 
 of secrecy with regard to what a priest hears in 
 ♦confession is most absolute, admitting of no ex- 
 ception whatever. A priest who was known to 
 have broken this law would be immediately 
 deprived of all right of exercising any office 
 whatever in the Church ; but; in point of fact 
 such a' case is unknown. There is no authentic 
 instance of this seal of confession being inten- 
 tionally broken, even by priests Nvho have lost 
 the faith and left the Church ; and even in 
 insanity or delirium it does not appear ever to 
 have been done. 
 
 There is another matter still upon which it 
 seems necessary to say a few words, though 
 they ought not to be needed ; and every decent 
 person must approach it reluctantly. It is the 
 charge made against the Church that the con- 
 fessional, so far from being a means by which 
 souls are cleansed from sin, is made in practice 
 a school of corruption, especially to persons of 
 the other sex. This charge is made, as a rule, 
 in the first place by certain apostate priests, who 
 profess to speak from experience. Others make 
 it on their authority. The simplest answer to 
 it is, that if such is the experience of these 
 priests, so much the worse for them personally ; 
 if there has been corruption in the confessional 
 
Confession. 
 
 239 
 
 in their experience, who but themselves can 
 have been the parties guilty of it? 
 
 The sole foundation for any general charge 
 of 4his kind is that, as all kinds of sins must be 
 confessed, those relating to impurity cannot be 
 excepted. It is then stated, as an obvious con- 
 sequence from this, that what are called ob- 
 scene'* questions must be asked, and in point 
 of fact are asked, by priests of penitents.-. 
 
 I reply : to say that such questions, or that 
 any questions at all, must necessarily be asked, 
 is not true. If a penitent is able and willing 
 to tell the sins which !iave to be told without 
 questioning, so much the better. If, however, 
 it is difficult, as it may naturally bie, to do 
 so, some questions may have to be asked to 
 make it easier, and also to prevent matters from 
 being stated which really are not necessary, but 
 which the penitent may imagine to be so. But 
 that such questions must be and are in fact 
 obscene, is again: a falsehood. As well might 
 one say that a physician must necessarily be 
 obscene in his treatment of patients, or that 
 phj^sicians, as a rule, are so. The physician 
 has to treat diseases of the body ; the priest, 
 those of the soul ; both, to do any good, must 
 know just what is the matter; the cases are 
 parallel. But neither need act or speak im- 
 purely or obscenely in doing so. What, then, 
 but a malignant hatred of the Church can make 
 
240 
 
 Confession. 
 
 any one say that a respectable physician can be 
 trusted, but that a priest cannot ; that a physi- 
 cian, who often makes no pretence to be spe- 
 cially conscientious, will avoid sin, while a 
 priest, whose conduct is otherwise blameless, 
 will commit it? The charge is not only one 
 of sin, which no one makes against physicians 
 as a rule, but also of most horrible hypocrisy 
 and sacrilege ; for the doctor is often nothing 
 but a man of the world, while the priest re- 
 ceives and dispenses the Sacraments daily. 
 What right have you tQ make such a hideous 
 accusation? The priest's duty can be done 
 with the greatest prudence and delicacy, as 
 well as the doctor's; why should not he, as 
 well as the doctor, do it in this way? It is 
 simply monstrous to say that as a rule, almost 
 without exception, he does or says anything in 
 this matter which would be wrong. ^ 
 
 I do not deny that there may be a rare excep- 
 tion here and there. One who never should 
 have been a priest may take upon himself this 
 sacred calling in spite of all the pains which are 
 taken to prevent this; and having done so, he 
 may abuse it. But we have a very strict law 
 to provide for such cases. Every penitent of 
 either sex to whom a priest in confession may 
 have used words with an obviously corrupting 
 and immoral intention is bound, under penalty 
 of mortal sin and the refusal of absolution, to 
 
Confession. 
 
 241 
 
 denounce such a priest to his bishop ; and any 
 priest who is found to be really guilty in this 
 respect is most severely reprimanded and de- 
 prived of his office. So that even an evil-dis- 
 posed priest can only be guilty of such an 
 offence by some incredible folly. ' 
 
 But, you may say, at least is not the priest*j> 
 mind, even if pure at the beginning, necessarily 
 corrupted by all the sins which he is obliged to 
 hear, and which, perhaps, previously he was 
 ignorant of? Strange as it may seem, I say it 
 is not, and this for several reasons. In the first 
 place, by a peculiar disposition of things, which 
 hardly seems altogether natural, though no 
 doubt it is partly so, a priest after hearing con- 
 fessions, say for an afternoon or evening, really 
 forgets almost all that he has heard. Some- 
 times if a person comes back who has been in 
 the confessional only a little while ago, the 
 priest has to make an effort, often an unsuccess- 
 ful one, to remember anything about his case. 
 One thing blots out another. Secondly, custom, 
 making the hearing of sins more monotonous 
 and tiresome, destroys the attraction they might 
 otherwise have. Thirdly, sins are not told by 
 sincere penitents in a way to tempt the listener. 
 Fourthly, if some one should come with a pre- 
 tended confession in order to produce such 
 temptation, not only would the priest naturally 
 be alarmed and horrified, but also he would 
 
242 
 
 Confession, 
 
 remember another point of the same law that 
 has been mentioned, namely, that any exterior 
 consent, though only verbal, to such an at- 
 tempt would subject him to the same report 
 being made to his bishop as in the other 
 case. 
 
 I hope that what has now been said with 
 reference to this nasty ^ calumny and the un- 
 worthy suspicion caused by it will suffice. I 
 regret that it should be necessary to say so 
 much about it ; but the gravity of the charge 
 makes it unavoidable. 
 
 In point of fact, the influence, of the confes- 
 sional, outside of the supernatural benefit of 
 absolution which we believe to be attached to 
 it, is good both for priest and penitent. The 
 former learns compassion for the weakness of 
 human nature ; also humility, for he sees how 
 he also might have fallen into great sins had 
 not God mercifully preserved him ; also care in 
 guarding against the occasions and temptations 
 which have proved so dangerous to others. 
 The latter frees his mind of secrets which were 
 weighing on it ; he knows the evil and the 
 danger of sin better than before ; he also knows 
 the obligations of justice or of charity which he 
 is under ; he receives advice how to guard 
 against sin for the future, and how to advance 
 in the way of virtue. This last matter, which 
 is known as spiritual direction, is the most 
 
Confession. 
 
 243 
 
 efficacious of all means for spiritual advance- 
 ment. 
 
 We have a great abundance of treatises on 
 the spiritual life, and these are, no doubt, of the 
 greatest profit to the reader ; probably there are 
 fifty to a hundred of such works among us to 
 one which Protestants have. And what won- 
 der ; for they have no fixed principles to start 
 with, they are always discussing and changing 
 their creeds, and never can advance to anything 
 beyond. But a word or two addressed per- 
 sonally to one's self, and based on one's own in- 
 dividual needs, even if spoken by one who is 
 himself only moderately advanced in learning 
 or sanctity, is often more efficacious than a 
 whole book. One piece of advice given by 
 one who knows the heart and soul is better 
 sometimes than a long talk from the best of 
 friends who have not such knowledge, or than 
 the most eloquent of sermons. 
 
CHAPTER XX. 
 
 1*HH CKI.IBACY OF CI.KRGY. 
 
 AS we have been speaking about the clergy 
 with relation to this matter of the confes- 
 sional, this seems an appropriate time also to 
 discuss another subject concerning them about 
 which remark is often made; that is the one 
 which forms the title of this chapter. Clerical 
 celibacy is regarded by those outside the 
 Church with feelings both of admiration and of 
 dislike. No one can fail to see that an un- 
 married man is more absolutely free to attend 
 to his work than one who has the care of a 
 family ; and also that he can afford to work for 
 a smaller salary ; so that a body of unmarried 
 clergy can be supported with less demand on 
 the money of the people than would be required 
 were they married. It also appears pretty clear 
 that if a clergyman is what he ought to be — 
 determined, that is, to serve God faithfully, he 
 not only can but will do so with less distraction 
 to what may be called side issues than if he had 
 a wife and family to attend to. I know that the 
 Protestant idea is that a good wife is a positive 
 help to a minister ; that she will make him bet- 
 ter and more zealous than he would be without 
 
 244 
 
The Celibacy of the Clergy, 245 
 
 her. St. Paul, however, it must be admitted 
 by Bible Christians, is something of an author- 
 ity on this point ; and he says : ' ' He that is 
 without a wife, is solicitous for the things that 
 belong to the lyord, how he may please God. 
 But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the 
 things of the world, how he may please his 
 wife; and he is divided.'* 
 
 It may, of course, be urged that this disad- 
 vantage is more than made up for in other ways, 
 at least for those clergymen who are regularly 
 settled in the care of a parish. We hardly 
 agree to this ; still the Catholic Church does 
 not exclude from her communion certain coun- 
 tries in which this custom prevails, and if 
 Russia, which is such a country, were recon- 
 ciled to Rome to-morrow, it is probable that 
 this discipline would still be tolerated there. 
 But there is not the slightest probability that 
 the rule of celibacy will ever be changed in 
 countries at present Catholic, or in Protestant 
 countries like England or America. 
 
 And one word should here be said with regard 
 to the married clergy of a country like Russia, 
 and of other countries either united to the Catho- 
 lic Church, or separated from it, which have a 
 similar discipline. 
 
 The clergy of these countries are married be- 
 fore ordination ; in other words, the candidate 
 for Holy Orders is expected or even required to 
 
246 The Celibacy of the Clergy. 
 
 be a married man, unless he belongs to a reli- 
 gious order, of which I shall have more to say 
 shortly. Whereas, in the properly Roman 
 system such candidate is expected to be un- 
 married, and must, if married, no longer live 
 with his wife, though the bond of marriage re- 
 mains unbroken. This latter plan has, how- 
 ever, proved objectionable, and at present is not 
 allowed in practice. ^ 
 
 But the Roman, Greek, and Oriental 
 churches agree that a man cannot marry after 
 ordination. So if the wife of a priest, whom he 
 has married before ordination, should die, he ii> 
 not allowed to marry again. This rule was ob- 
 served from the earliest times throughout Chris- 
 ^ tendom, though the ''special discipline of the 
 Roman Church is of later institution. 
 
 So the taking of a wife by a priest, and 
 ^ especially by a bishop, after receiving his or- 
 ders, was an innovation of the Reformers, not 
 warranted in any way by Christian tradition. 
 In the case of Luther and some others it was a 
 double or triple violation of the rules of the 
 Church, for lyUther was not only a priest, but a 
 monk ; and the wife whom he took was a nun. 
 
 But to return to the consideration of the es- 
 sential advantages and disadvantages of celi- 
 bacy. I think that all will really admit, that 
 for the eflSciency of the clergy it is better on the 
 whole than the state of marriage ; the only 
 
The Celibacy of the Clergy, 247 
 
 thing that seems in the minds of Protestants to 
 be a conclusive argument against it is, that it 
 produces immorality ; that it is impossible, or 
 at least highly improbable, that an unmarried 
 clergy can be actually chaste and pure. In 
 short, they regard vii;ginity, at least in men, to 
 be practically out of the question ; that is the 
 plain statement of the case. 
 
 This is^ of course, an insult against the Catho- 
 lic clergy ; it is a deliberate accusation against 
 us, not only of grievous sin, but also of most 
 damnable hypocrisy ; for that we profess to leaa 
 pure lives tliere can be no doubt. But further- 
 more, the charge, even abstractly made, is a 
 direct denial of the words of Christ Himself 
 Vor we read in the nineteenth chapter of St. 
 Matthew's gospel, that when those who heard 
 the strictness of the law laid down by Him con- 
 cerning marriage, said that according to this 
 law it would not be expedient to marry (v. 10), 
 He warned them against such a conclusion be- 
 ing taken as a general rule; ''All men," He 
 says, take not this word, but they to whom it 
 is given'* (v. 11). But nevertheless he en- 
 couraged and advised some to adopt it ; ' ' He 
 that ?an take, let him take it" (v. 12). 
 
 Now, these words were not said ironically ; no 
 one could think that. They were said serious- 
 ly, inviting men to follow His own example. 
 
 I would advise you also to read the opening 
 
248 The Celibacy of the Clergy. 
 
 of the fourteenth chapter of the Apocalypse, or 
 Revelation of St. John. He says: beheld; 
 and lo a I^amb stood upon Mount Sion, and 
 with him an hundred forty-four thousand hav- 
 ing his name and the name of his Father 
 written on their foreheads. And I heard a 
 voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, 
 and as the voice of great thunder ; and the 
 voice, which I heard, was as the voice of harpers, 
 harping on their harps. And they sung as it 
 were a new canticle before the throne, and be- 
 fore the four living creatures, and the ancients : 
 and no man could say the canticle, but those 
 hundred forty-four thousand, who were pur- 
 chased from the earth. These are they who 
 were not defiled with women : for they are vir- 
 gins. These follow the I^amb whithersoever 
 He goeth. These were purchased from among 
 men, the first-fruits to God and to the Lamb ; 
 and in their mouth there was found no lie ; for 
 they are without spot before the throne of God.'* 
 I think I have said enough to show that no 
 Christian can maintain that virginity is a thing 
 practically impossible for men, even to be pre- 
 served through life ; and that the hundred and 
 forty-four thousand is meant to represent not an 
 exact but a very large number is plain from 
 another passage in the same revelation (chapter 
 vii.), where the same number is represented as 
 those saved among the children of Israel. Cer- 
 
The Celibacy of the Clergy, 249 
 
 tainly that would be a pitiful proportion to at- 
 tain salvation among all the hundreds of mil- 
 lions that will have lived of God's chosen people. 
 
 It is no more, then, than right Christian 
 faith, as well as fairness and justice to your^ 
 neighbor, to believe that in the mouth of the 
 Catholic priesthood professing chastity as they 
 do, there is found no lie.** Exceptions there 
 may be and no doubt have been in all ages of 
 the Church ; there was a traitor even among the 
 Apostles. But that the very great majority of 
 the clergy of the Church live as they claim that 
 they do, is not only possible, but certain. 
 
 And the same thing is true of the religious 
 orders, both of men and women. They, how- 
 ever, besides renouncing marriage and living in 
 chastity like priests, also abandon the use of 
 property by the vow of poverty, and the free 
 exercise of their own wills by the vow of obedi- 
 ence. They make every possible sacrifice of 
 what men value in this world ; and why ? \v 
 order to have a closer union with God. 
 
 I have said something in the chapter on the 
 precepts of the Church concerning mortifica- 
 tion ; that is, the abandoning of the good things 
 of this world for God's sake. The religious 
 orders carry this to the highest degree And 
 let no one say that to do so is superstition ; for 
 it has^the direct sanction of Christ. Read the 
 last verses of this $ame_ nineteenth chapter of 
 
250 
 
 The Celibacy of the Clergy. 
 
 Matthew which I have already called your at- 
 tention to. You will find there an account of a 
 young man who told our Lord that he had kept 
 all the commandments, and Christ did not con- 
 tradict him ; but He said, ** If thou wilt be per- 
 fect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the 
 poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven : 
 and come, follow me/* Peter, moved by this, 
 and by what our Lord also said about the diffi- 
 culty of salvation for the rich, said to Him : 
 ** Behold, we have left ^all things and followed 
 thee; what therefore shall we have?** Christ 
 made to him and his companions first special 
 promises on account of their apostolic office ; 
 then He said: And every one that hath left 
 house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or 
 mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my 
 name's sake : shall receive an hundred-fold, and 
 shall possess life everlasting.** 
 
 The same thing is related in the tenth chap- 
 ter of St. Mark's gospel, and the eighteenth of 
 that according to St. Luke. And the Christian 
 who would maintain that our Lord does not en- 
 courage what priests and the religious orders 
 practise, has really no resource but to cut these 
 chapters out of his Bible. 
 
 In the beginning I have represented the celi- 
 bacy of the clergy as if it were principally in- 
 stituted for the sake of greater efficiency anci 
 exterior application to the work of the ministry. 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 251 
 
 But really its principal reason is that the priest 
 by giving up special human relations of love, 
 however good in themselves, may love God 
 more ardently and be united more closely with 
 Him ; and that his love of his fellow-men may 
 be on this very account more intense and self- 
 sacrificing, while it is at the same time more 
 supernatural and impartial. And the constant 
 experience of all Christian times shows thdt the 
 experiment, if so it may be called, has been a 
 signal success* 
 
 CHAPTER, kxi, 
 
 MODERN MIRACI<KS. 
 
 ONE of the great objections to the Catholic 
 Church in the minds of at least a good 
 many Protestants, is that she claims that 
 mirades are still worked within her pale. 
 
 Of course it is easy to see that those who do 
 not believe in the Church would naturally 
 doubt or deny that she had in any way a spe- 
 cial gift or prerogative of miracles, for such a 
 gift would be inconsistent, at least if frequently 
 or abundantly manifested, with their theory 
 about her ; it would seem to show, if admitted 
 as a fact, that she was really a Divine institu- 
 tion. Naturally, then, Protestants must dis- 
 credit Catholic miracles, or at any rate refuse 
 
252 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 to admit that they are worked with the fre» 
 quency that we claim. One or two, here and 
 there, they might allow, just as we can allow 
 are, or may be, worked outside~~The Church; 
 as, for instance, Balaam had the miraculous 
 gift of prophecy at least on one occasion (Num- 
 bers xxiv.) To show even more clearly that 
 - such may be the case, we find in St. Mark's 
 gospel the following account : * ' John answered 
 him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out 
 devils in thy name, who followeth not us, and 
 we forbade him. But Jesus said : Do not forbid 
 him. For there is no man that doth a miracle 
 in my name, and can soon speak ill of me. For 
 he that is not against you, is for you (ix. 37- 
 39) . But the habitual or frequent working of 
 miracles, especially in a permanent institution 
 like the Catholic Church, or the working of 
 miracles in attestation of a special doctrine, as 
 that of Elias against the prophets of Baal (I. 
 Kings xviii.) is a different matter altogether. 
 
 It is then natural, as I have said, that Catho- 
 lic miracles, as we allege them to occur, should 
 be disallowed by those outside the Church ; and 
 that — though it might be admitted that a few 
 were genuine — they need not be examined into 
 specially, as it would be deemed impossible 
 that any great number of them could be well 
 supported, or that they could have any special 
 significance. And furthermore, it is natural 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 253 
 
 that Protestants should be indignant at our 
 claiming that miracles are not infrequent 
 among us ; for this seems like falsely arrogating 
 to ourselves a special mark of Divine favor. 
 
 Nevertheless, taking this ground cannot 
 make the Bible Christian altogether easy. 
 For, it is recorded in the sacred text that our 
 Lord distinctly predicted that his disciples 
 should work miracles. **Amen, amen, I say 
 to you, he that belie veth in me, the works that 
 I do, he also shall do, and greater than these 
 shall he do. Because I go to the Father'' 
 (John xiv. 12-13). 
 
 The only Protestant way of accounting for 
 this prediction not being verified at the present 
 day — for that it is verified among Catholics can- 
 not, of course, be supposed for a moment — is to 
 take the ground that * * the age of miracles has 
 passed." Of course the Bible does not say 
 that it was going to pass ; Christ's words, given 
 above, seem to apply to those who should truly 
 believe in him in every age. But there is no 
 other way out of the difficulty except that of be- 
 lieving what Catholics say. 
 
 So Protestant Christians are pretty well 
 agreed on this view of the matter. But I am 
 afraid that some of them are slipping away 
 gradually to a somewhat lower ground. They 
 accept the miracles of the Bible because they 
 have always been accustomed to take them as 3 
 
254 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 matter of course ; but they hardly realize them 
 as facts. Not admitting such things as occur- 
 ring nowadays, they are gradually coming to 
 think that they could hardly have occurred 
 then. 
 
 There is, it is true, a kind of reaction setting 
 in lately in favor of the supernatural. Still, it 
 has a hard fight to make in the minds of non- 
 Catholics against the claim so loudly made by 
 many scientists that the laws of nature are im- 
 mutable. People have come, on account of 
 this claim, to regard the laws of nature as 
 being very much like those of mathematics, 
 essentially inherent in the very nature of things. 
 
 Now, there is really no scientific: basis — and 
 here I speak as a scientific man — for this state- 
 ment about the immutability of the laws of 
 nature. All that scientific men can say truly 
 is, that in the observations and experiments 
 that they make they do not find these laws 
 changing ; that the apparent anomalies which 
 present themselves have been found to be re- 
 ducible to law, and that it is reasonable to pre- 
 sume they can always be thus reduced. But to 
 say that it is absolutely certain, for instance, 
 that one particle of matter will always attract 
 another according to the law of gravitation, or 
 other laws working regularly, is evidently to 
 make matter independent of its Creator ; it is to 
 deny that God has any power to control or alter 
 
Modern Miracles, 
 
 255 
 
 the action of the creatures which He has made. 
 It is really then to deny the existence of God; 
 foi- the^ necessafy idea of God is that He is 
 omnipotent. 
 
 Now, of course, any man, scientific or other- 
 wise, may, if he choose, deny the existence of 
 an almighty God ; but that such denial can be 
 a scientific statement is simply impossible, for 
 physical science — of course it is in that sense 
 we are using the term — does not and cannot 
 handle that question. All wise and prudent 
 scientists acknowledge this, and confess that in 
 their discussions they are only speaking of the 
 existence and operation of various physical 
 causes ; that they catmot tell for certain from 
 their investigations whether there be any cause 
 behind these or not. The most they can say is 
 that nature does not prove the existence of God 
 to them; but to say that it disproves it would 
 be absurd. They may say that God is unknow- 
 able on the lines on which they work ; we need 
 not inquire whether this is true or not ; but sc 
 far they are speaking as scientists ; that is, they 
 are making a statement about the matter which 
 is their specialty. But when they say that He 
 is unknowable on any other 'lines, othey are 
 going beyond the bounds of their science ; and 
 when they say He does not exist, they are 
 going a very long step further. They are 
 talking as foolishly as one would talk who, 
 
256 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 having lived all his life in a dark cellar, should 
 announce as the result of his observations, that 
 it was simply impossible there should be sucli 
 an object as the sun. All he can rightly say is 
 that the observations he has been able to make 
 do not indicate anything of the kind ; that he 
 sees no reason to believe that there is anything 
 brighter in existence than his gas jet or kero- 
 sene lamp. 
 
 Christians, then, need not be in the slightest 
 degree affected by statements of this kind from 
 scientists. We believe there is an omnipotent 
 God ; and it necessarily follows from this, that 
 He can change the laws of nature if He 
 chooses. You probably will admit that God 
 can control the action of our minds, and compel 
 us to think this or that ; why, then, can He not 
 direct or entirely change the action of a piece 
 of brute matter, either permanently o^ tem- 
 porarily, if He desires so to do ? 
 
 But now I want to call your attention to a 
 point generally overlooked in this question 
 about miracles. And it is this; that what is 
 truly called a miracle is not necessarily a sus- 
 pension or change of the laws of nature at all. 
 If that were admitted as the definition of the 
 word, it would be hard to show that most of the 
 miracles related in the Bible were truly such. 
 Take, for instance, the passing of the Israelites 
 under Moses through the Red Sea. It is not at 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 257 
 
 all necessary here to suppose that the laws caus- 
 ing water to seek a level were suspended ; no 
 more in this case than in the case where the 
 waters are similarly divided by the hull of a 
 ship as it passes along. In this latter case the 
 laws are working all the time ; but their opera- 
 tion is temporarily resisted by the pressure of 
 the ship's sides. So all we have to suppose in 
 the case of the division of the Red Sea is that 
 a force like that of the pressure of a ship's sides 
 acts on the water, causing it to stand up, as^ 
 the Scripture tells us, * * as a wall on the right 
 hand and on the left.'* 
 
 Now, we know of no scientific apparatus 
 which will produce such an effect without the 
 introduction of a material visible object, like a 
 ship ; but who can say for certain that such an 
 effect might not be produced by some invention 
 yet to be made? To suppose, however, that 
 Moses was in possession of such a scientific 
 secret, would evidently be the wildest imagina- 
 tion. But to one who believes in the existence 
 of mighty beings such as the angels are, ac- 
 cording to the representations of Scripture, the 
 problem presents no difficulty. If to four 
 angels (Apoc. vii. 2) power was given to 
 hurt the earth and the sea, surely to even one 
 of them such a task as this would be very 
 light, without having the laws of nature sub* 
 pended at all. 
 
358 Modern Miracles. 
 
 Belief, then, in what is often and rightly call- 
 ed a miracle, simply requires belief in the exist- 
 ence of beings in themselves imperceptible to our 
 senses, but able to produce effects which are 
 perceptible, and whose forces are not exerted in 
 obedience to any regular laws, in the sense in 
 which we understand that term as applying to 
 nature. The fact is that our own voluntary 
 movements are of the nature of miracles, only 
 prevented from being called so by the frequency 
 of their occurrence. If only one of our species 
 were gifted with the faculty of locomotion, the 
 rest being stationary and incapable of move- 
 ment except under the influence of external 
 forces, like trees, the movements of this one 
 would seem to the rest miraculous, especially if 
 only seldom occurring. His aim should hang 
 down by his side, in accordance with the law 
 of gravity, unless raised by some other force 
 acting according to law, that is, always in the 
 same way in the same circumstances. But we 
 should find that in the same physical circum- 
 stances it sometimes hangs down, sometimes is 
 raised. If it was only raised several times in 
 his life, the raising would be a- miracle; we 
 might — if it were possible under our supposed 
 conditions — investigate physical laws for ever, 
 but we should never be able to explain it. 
 
 To illustrate this further, let us now suppose 
 the man's soul, which causes bodily movements 
 
Modern Miracles. 259 
 
 in some way that we are familiar with, but 
 probably shall never be able in this life to fully 
 understand, to be separated from his body ; or 
 in other words, that its usual way — whatever 
 that may be — of operating on the body is at an 
 end ; in short, that the man is dead. Of course 
 lam here assuming, as^I have a right to do, 
 that the soul can exist without a body. Now, 
 let us suppose that a new way is provided in 
 which it can operate on Ijie body, so that the 
 body gets up and walks, for instance ; here we 
 have a miracle. And yet its action on the body 
 is no more reducible to purely physical laws 
 before he dies, than it would be should it 
 occur after death. 
 
 Now, what absurdity it would be in a sci- 
 entist to maintain that such a thing could not 
 possibly happen! He may say indeed, **I do 
 not believe that there is any such thing as a 
 soul, or at least a disembodied one"; but he 
 knows perfectly well that he cannot prove this 
 by scientific investigation. He is sure, or if he 
 is not, everybody else is, that while he is alive 
 and well he can raise his arm or not, as he 
 chooses ; how can he be sure, or make any one 
 else so, that he cannot do so after his body goes 
 through the change which we call death? 
 
 All he can say is, Such phenomena have not 
 come under my observation ' * ; or, in common 
 unscientific language, I never saw anything oj 
 
26o 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 tliat kind." But the phenomena wliich he ob- 
 serves in himself and other beings like him- 
 self during life, he knows perfectly well cannot 
 be accounted for by physical laws ; he would 
 not be such a fool^ as to attempt to formulate 
 laws by which it could be infallibly determined 
 what his own or anybody else's actions would be 
 for a single day. He may succeed in doing that 
 for the clouds and the winds ; but if he tried to 
 do that even for himself, he would most certainly 
 break them. Wh}^ then, cannot a dead body, 
 or any other mass of matter, perform actions un- 
 accountable by physical law^s ? 
 
 The fact is, then, as has been said, that mir- 
 acles may almost universally be accounted for 
 by supposing the existence , of beings acting 
 voluntarily as we act, but disembodied and im- 
 perceptible to our senses, and possessed of more 
 or less powder over material things ; or if we are 
 indisposed to admit that — though no sound 
 reason can be given for such indisposition— by 
 granting the existence of one such all-powerful 
 Being,, who acts in and controls nature on cer- 
 tain occasions without breaking the laws of 
 force He has implanted in it, any more than we 
 break them when we so act in and control it 
 frequently, as we actually do. 
 
 But, as has just been remarked, no sound 
 reason can be given for restricting these ex- 
 traordinary occurrences to the immediate action 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 261 
 
 of this one Being. And not making any such 
 restriction is not only more reasonable, but it 
 better explains what, in spite of some scientists, 
 are really observed facts, which they would do 
 well to heed. 
 
 It leads also to the classification of these oc-c 
 currences into distinct groups. We find some 
 in which, the interference with nature being 
 directed to no good end, it would appear that 
 the beings causing it are malevolent in their 
 action, and are simply allowed thus to exert 
 their bad will ; others in which there is a good 
 end or effect, in which case it is to be supposed 
 they are benevolent, and act in obedience to 
 God, or with His approval ; thirdly, some in 
 which it seems more or less clear that the ac- 
 tion is that of God Himself ; as would naturally 
 be inferred if it should seem that His laws of 
 nature were in the instance suspended. For 
 it is His own action which constitutes the laws ; 
 His, therefore, it would be to suspend them. 
 . It is His to give power to His creation ; His, 
 therefore, to take away that which it regularly 
 and constantly exerts ; for it exerts it in imme- 
 diate and constant dependence on Him, and it 
 is not for others directly to interfere with it, 
 though they may neutralize it by contrary^ ac- 
 tion on their own part. 
 
 It is, of course, a difficult matter to tell for 
 certain to which of these three classes a pheno- 
 
262 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 menon occurs which cannot be accounted fof 
 by natural laws combined with human agency ; 
 so that it is hard to be sure of the significance 
 of such phenomena. It is a v^ry dangerous 
 mistake to confidently adduce those which can 
 well be produced by evil spirits as foundations 
 of a new religion, or testimonies to some par- 
 ticular doctrine; that is plain enough. It is 
 equally or more so to ascribe what are really 
 the works of God or His angels to devils, as 
 the Jews did in the case of the miracles of our 
 Lord. Dearly beloved," says St. John, be- 
 lieve not every spirit, but try the spirits if they 
 be of God ; because many false prophets are 
 gone out into the world " (I. John iv. i). It 
 would be well if this advice was heeded by 
 those who become interested in modern spirit- 
 ism ; we frequently see persons who have 
 scoffed at its ' * signs and wonders * * as being 
 mere humbug and trickery, become convinced, 
 and on good grounds too, that such is not al- 
 ways the case, and then suddenly jump to the, 
 conclusion that the alleged truths which they 
 are adduced to prove are really such. Simply 
 that some spirit asserts some fact with regard to 
 the future life is in itself no more a proof that 
 it is really a fact, than that some man asserts 
 some fact with regard to this life. The man 
 may be a liar; so may the spirit too. 
 
 The Church has tests which it applies for the 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 263 
 
 discernment of preternatural occurrences, vis- 
 ions, revelations, and the like. St. John indeed 
 gives such a test in the very place I have 
 quoted. He goes on to say (v. 2): Every 
 spirit, which confesseth that Jesus Christ is 
 come in the flesh, is of God." This was ap- 
 plicable specially, and intended specially for, 
 the lying spirits of his time. 
 
 I have said it is a difl&cult matter to discern 
 the spirits ; it is also a diflScult matter to tell 
 whether any spirit at all be concerned in the 
 matter, for it may of course be merely natural. 
 Here also the Church is fully on her guard. 
 
 Protestants generally imagine that the Catho- 
 lic Church is extremely ready to accept ap- 
 parent miracles worked within her pale as be- 
 ing really stich, and to jmlm them off on the 
 people. They think that we are really stuffed 
 by the Church with miracles and legends. It 
 is true that a great many have been reported_in 
 all ages of the Church, and are to be found in 
 some books, particularly in the lives of the 
 saints ; but it is well understood by us that the 
 Church does not make herself responsible for 
 all such stories, or build in any way upon them. 
 
 The Church simply proceeds in the following 
 reasonable way: First, she admits that super- 
 natural or^preternatgural events, divine or dia- 
 bolical, ma:y occur at any time. To deny this is 
 iimpiy folly ; Rousseau himself baf said that 
 
264 Modern Miracles. 
 
 those who do so are only fit for a lunatic asy- 
 lum. I would not go quite so far as that. 
 
 Secondly, as to the great majority of such 
 alleged events she passes no judgment at all ; 
 she allows them to be told, and believed by 
 those who choose to believe them, as long as 
 they are not in themselves of ^n absurd or 
 superstitious character. She also allows us to 
 privately believe them to be of divine or angelic 
 origin, as long as they do not tend to immoral- 
 ity or impiety. 
 
 But thirdly, when she is called on to pass a 
 judgment as to their genuineness and their 
 source, and to allow them to be used in her 
 name as a proof of any doctrine, or of the holi- 
 ness of any individual by whose co-operation 
 they are said to have been brought about, she 
 proceeds with excessive care and caution. 
 
 This principally occurs in the canonization of 
 saints ; that is, in the definite determination on 
 the part of the Church as to whether or no it is 
 certain that some person, one who has died*" 
 with a reputation for great and extraordinary 
 virtue, really was possessed of such virtue, and 
 has therefore become in the next life specially 
 near and dear to God ; so that he or she can be 
 confidently proposed to the faithful in general 
 as a model for their imitation, and safely and 
 profitably invoked by them as an intercessor 
 before God. 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 265 
 
 On such occasions a most strict inquiry is 
 made into the life of the person in question, not 
 only by collecting testimony as to his good and 
 virtuous acts, but also by trying to pick flaws in 
 his virtue, to see if some weaknesses or imper- 
 fections cannot be found in his character or 
 actions, not serious in themselves, but enough 
 to prevent his being considered an eminent 
 model of sanctity. 
 
 Inquiry is also made as to whether he per- 
 formed any miracles in his life-time ; but the 
 most important thing is to ascertain whether 
 any have been worked since his death as a re- 
 sult of prayers asking his intercession. Catho- 
 lics are inclined to address requests for miracu- 
 lous favors, especially for cures in dangerous 
 illnesses, to such as they believe to have 
 crowned an eminently holy life by a good death, 
 and who, they think, may be already in heaven 
 without having had to pass through purgatory. 
 
 It is necessary for the canonization of a saint 
 that two miraculous favors should be clearly 
 shown to be obtained after his death by his in- 
 tercession. There are often rumors of quite a 
 number, but most of these are dismissed as im- 
 possible of proof and unworthy of attention. 
 The evidence for those which are examined is 
 sifted very carefully, and every possibie objec- 
 tion raised by an official specially appointed for 
 that purpose, the ground being fought step bj 
 
.66 
 
 Modern Miracles. 
 
 step. Those which are rejected often have far 
 more than the usual evidence which is deemed 
 sufficient in a court of law. The result Is con*^ 
 vincing to all who do not take the ground, 
 which has been shown to be absurd, that a 
 miracle is impossible, and" that no amount oi" 
 evidence can prove it. 
 
 I trust that you see that in this matter the 
 Church simply takes the ground of common 
 sense. At least, if you were in the least degree 
 familiar with the actual facts, you would see 
 that it is absolutely certain that miracles do 
 occur, in accordance with the promise of Christ, 
 quite frequently among us ; but, of course, witk 
 the real miracles some false ones are mixed up. 
 To prove the truth or reality of a miracle, it 
 must be examined ; it is merely a question of 
 evidence, when we once admit the possibility 
 of it, as all sensible men must do, even though 
 they may not believe in God. For to disprove 
 His existence, and the existence of invisible 
 spirits in general, free from the constraint of 
 physical laws is, as has been remarked, simply 
 impossible.^ It is hard enough in most cases to 
 prove a negative ; in this case it cannot be 
 done. 
 
 The Church does examine a miracle, when 
 anything depends on it. The rest she does 
 not definitely approve; nor, as a rul^, does she 
 condemn them; she lets tbem sUnd 9n tbeir, 
 
Modern Miracles. 
 
 267 
 
 own merits. Have you any wiser course to 
 suggest ? 
 
 I would advise you to look into the evidence 
 upon this matter a little. This subject is so 
 vast that of course I cannot begin to discuss it 
 here, nor could it be treated in any one book. 
 But for a beginning, perhaps, nothing better 
 could be selected than the account of the mira- 
 cles at the shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes, in 
 France". These are quite recent, and going on 
 at the present time ; and books about them can 
 be got at any Catholic book-store. If you read 
 about them, you will have some difficulty in 
 believing that * ' the age of miracles has 
 passed.'* They are not legends, or nursery 
 stories, but hard solid facts. If you once take 
 up this subject in earnest, you will find that 
 ** there are more things in heaven and earth 
 than are dreamed of in. your philosophy/* 
 
CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 SUPERSTITION. 
 
 CONNECTED with the subject I have been 
 discussing is a general charge made 
 against us, which I have already partially re- 
 futed. It may be expressed in this way. A 
 Protestant will say : ' ' I do not doubt that you 
 Catholics are sometimes quite pious, especially 
 the more intelligent among you ; many of you 
 probably worship God in spirit and in truth, 
 nearly as well as we do ; but such are better 
 than their religion. The great mass of your 
 people are chock-full of superstition ; they 
 think everything of holy water or a blessed 
 candle, and believe that such things are going 
 to save their souls ; and the worst of it is, the 
 Church encourages them in these ideas. Why, 
 you will hear men, or even boys, among you 
 cursing and swearing, and they think that 
 makes no difference as long as the priest has 
 put what you call a scapular round their 
 necks.'' 
 
 Well, I do not deny that there are such 
 
 things as holy water, blessed candles, and 
 
 scapulars, .nor that the Church approves of 
 
 them, and wishes us to use them. But that 
 268 
 
Superstition. 269 
 
 Catholics think more of them than of the 
 commandments of God, or trust in them more 
 than in genuine piety and virtue, I do deny- 
 altogether. 
 
 Every Catholic that has any instruction at 
 all from the Church knows that his salvation 
 depends entirely on one thing ; that is, upon his 
 spiritual state at the time of his death. He 
 knows that if he has committed mortal sins, 
 and die's without repenting of them, he will go 
 to hell ; but that if he has repented of them 
 and beeu forgiven, he will go to heaven, 
 though he may have to go to purgatory first. 
 
 At the same time he knows that certain 
 means and helps for him to attain this end, 
 to live well and to die well, have been estab- 
 lished for him in the Church. First among 
 these are the Sacraments instituted by Christ. 
 But these are principally available for him 
 when he is in the state of grace or the love 
 of God ; they are mostly helps for him to re- 
 main or persevere in that state, not to get into 
 it when he has lost it. Moreover, of these only 
 one can be approached frequently or used habit- 
 ually; that is the great Sacrament of the 
 Eucharist. 
 
 When he is in the state of sin — that is, when 
 he has fallen into mortal sin, but has deter- 
 mined to repent of sin and turn from it — he has, 
 it is true, one Sacrament ; the Sacrament of 
 
270 
 
 Superstition, 
 
 Penance or confession. But how when he has 
 not as yet the strength or courage to avail him- 
 self of this ? Is he going to give up in despair, 
 or simply wait for God to change him ? 
 
 You will say he can pray. Well, we say 
 that too ; in fact, we say there is little chance 
 for him unless he does; and that if he prays 
 faithfully and constantly, he will certainly get 
 grace to repent in earnest. But cannot any- 
 thing else be done to help him in this ; to make 
 it easier for him ; to remind him of it ? Cannot 
 he be surrounded in some way with things that 
 are holy, that will suggest holy thought^ to his 
 mind ? 
 
 The ChurcL d.^es not forget her children, 
 even though they may be in the power of ^atan 
 for a time, and wandering off in the ways of 
 sin. She is always going out into the desert, 
 and trying to save the sheep that are lost. 
 Hence she institutes certain means, something 
 like the Sacraments, but which even the sinner, 
 though still unrepentant, can use without fear 
 of sacrilege, to make a bond between him and 
 the grace which he has lost ; a clew by which 
 he can find his way back from the wilderness to 
 his true home. 
 
 These means are what we call the sacra- 
 mentals; just such things as you have been 
 speaking of ; holy water, blessed candles, scap- 
 ulars, and the like. Take the scapular, for 
 
Superstition. 
 
 271 
 
 instance. It reminds every Catholic of the 
 Blessed Mother of God, who is also his mother, 
 and has, as he feels, the love of a mother for 
 him, even though he be a sinner, and on the 
 way to ruin. It is to him like a locket with his 
 own mother's hair in it, or some other keepsake 
 that she has given him. Such a thing reminds 
 the erring son of his mother's prayers for him, 
 of the example which she gave him, and of the 
 prayers which he himself once said as a child 
 by her side,. Is this superstition ? If not, how 
 is it superstition for a Catholic to keep on a 
 scapular, even if he feels he is not worthy of it ? 
 The worst of it is that when he goes too far he 
 does eve;^ give this up. 
 
 I might i.peak similarly of the other things 
 that have been mentioned. That even bad 
 Catholics should have a devotion to them is not 
 superstition, but a remnant of the faith and 
 piety which they once had, and which they still 
 hope to regain. All these things have their 
 significance, and their association with what is 
 good and holy ; and what else, till he repents, 
 can the poor sinner have ? He does not think 
 they will of themselves suffice ; that is a mis- 
 take of yours. ^ 
 
 However, these sacramentals have their other 
 uses. They are not instituted simply for the 
 purpose I kdve set forth. Good Catholics also 
 use them; and, indeed, if they did not others 
 
272 
 
 Superstition. 
 
 would hardly do so, for it would be a confession 
 or profession of sin in themselves. And they 
 are believed to have a special efficacy ; that by 
 being set apart and blessed by the Church for 
 holy uses exclusively, they become specially 
 helpful to all of us, as the Sacraments them- 
 selves are, though in a less degree ; and that 
 they become like everything else on which God 
 has set, as it were. His seal— an object of dread 
 to His enemies, the fallen angels. 
 
 The regular use of objects then, or practices, 
 like the sign of the cross, blessed "or recom- 
 mended by the Church, is not superstition. Su- 
 perstition is properly the assigning of effects 
 without a reasonable cause; the adherence to, 
 or avoidance of, certain practices in themselves 
 senseless and unmeaning; or the endeavor to 
 discover the future or accomplish some desired 
 end by means evidently inadequate. To consult 
 fortune-tellers is superstitious, if it is not even 
 worse ; so it is to believe in dreams ; or to refuse 
 to sit down with thirteen at table. 
 
 Now, of course I do not mean to say that no 
 Catholics can be found who believe in things 
 like these ; but I do say that these beliefs a/e 
 not distinctively or specially Catholic. Also 1 
 can tell you that_ the influence of the Church is 
 always and uniformly against these or any other 
 superstitions. Of course she does not succeed 
 in rooting them out of the minds or of the prac* 
 
Superstition. 
 
 tice of the faithful ; but she does succeed in 
 making them understand that these things are 
 always more or less sinful, and in some cases 
 grievously so. All that listen to her voice know 
 that they are matters to be repented of, to be 
 confessed, and to be abandoned; and that is a 
 great deal more than most other people under- 
 stand. 
 
 If you say, however, that Catholics are natu- 
 rally more prone to believe such things than 
 others of the same grade of education, because 
 the habit of belief is so much more exercised 
 and developed in them, I agree that it would 
 seem as if such ought to be the case. But 
 whether it be on account of the salutary in- 
 structions which they receive on this point, or 
 for some other reason, it does not appear that 
 such is in fact the case. Still, even if it should 
 at any time be proved by accurate statistics that 
 our people are slightly more credulous than 
 others, it does not seem to me a' very serious 
 charge. It is better to be slightly supersti- 
 tious than not to accept what God has revealed ; 
 it is better to believe a liftle too much than a 
 great deal too little. 
 
CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 TH^ CHURCH OPPOSED TO SCIENCE. 
 
 NOW we come to a charge which, if it were 
 only true, would indeed be quite a serious 
 matter. It is that the Catholic Church is op- 
 posed to natural science ; that she has fought it 
 all along tooth and nail, and only given up at 
 one point or another where she was obliged to ; 
 that she still objects to it and resists it as far as 
 possible ; that she does not wish Catholics to 
 become familiar with or to accept its teachings. 
 
 Is any reason alleged why the Church should 
 take this attitude ? Oh, yes ! our objectors say^ 
 that the reason is plain. If Catholics were al- 
 lowed to study science, they would see the 
 errors of their creed ; they would see that what 
 the Church teaches is contrary to the glorious 
 discoveries of modern times, and they would 
 give up their old benighted Church, and join in 
 the march of thought. And then how would 
 the priests get their living ? ' * some will go on 
 to say ; * * they live on the ignorance of the 
 people, and cannot afford to let them learn what 
 science teaches.*' 
 
 Of course this last insinuation is an insult to 
 us ; it implies that the whole business of the 
 Catholic religion, in the minds of its priests, is 
 274 
 
The Church opposed to Science. 275 
 
 to make money out of the people, not to make 
 them better or to save their souls. But the 
 first part, or the charge in general, is insulting 
 as well. For what does it mean? It means 
 that we know our creed is false, and will not 
 bear the light of scientific truth to be cast on it ; 
 well, then, we are teaching and professing 
 something which we know to be a lie. 
 
 People should think well before they make 
 statements of this sort, even if they do make 
 them in ignorance. Those who say these 
 things generally are ignorant, for they do not 
 know what the Church does teach ; but they 
 ought to get out of their ignorance and know 
 what they are talking about, and not indulge in 
 flinging mud at random. 
 
 Perhaps they will try to turn the tables on us 
 and say : Oh ! wq^ don't mean that exactly/ 
 We think you don't know exactly what science 
 does teach ; that you priests are somewhat in 
 the dark yourselves, as you say we are. We 
 don't doubt you are good men, but of course 
 you are so occupied with your masses and 
 prayers and ceremonies of one kind or another, 
 that you are rather behind the times, and don't 
 know all that science has lately discovered.'* 
 
 But that will hardly do either ; for in that 
 case, my scientific friends, why should we op- 
 pose it, as you say we do ? If we really do op- 
 pose it ; if we agree with you in saying there is 
 
2y6 The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 a conflict or an issue between science and reli« 
 gion, you have no reason to say we are igno- 
 rant of science. If there was a disagreement ; 
 if you maintained that science agreed with reli- 
 gion, and we said it did not, then indeed you 
 might say we were ignorant of science ; but the 
 charge hardly works as things stand. 
 
 What I have just given, however, as a sup- 
 posed case, is the real case, if we reverse the 
 parties in the discussion. The fact is, that we 
 maintain that science does agree with religion, 
 and you say it does not. By making the state- 
 ment that there is a conflict between the two, 
 you expose your own ignorance, not necessarily 
 of science, but of the Catholic religion. 
 . *' What is that?*' you will perhaps ask. 
 
 Do you mean to say that the Catholic Church 
 endorses evolution, allows that the human race 
 may have been for millions of years on this 
 planet, believes t^iat what is called the soul of 
 man is only a result of certain combinations of 
 matter, etc.? Why, not long ago you your- 
 self said something which would not square 
 with this last conclusion.*' 
 
 I do not deny that I did. But let us see 
 what I said just now. I said that there was no 
 conflict between science and religion ; but I do 
 not mean by ''science** all the crude or half- 
 baked theories which scientific men may put 
 forward. I do not blame them for putting them 
 
The Church opposed to Science^ 277 
 
 forward ; theories, or what are called working 
 hypotheses, are necessary means for the ad- 
 vancement of science. But no genuine scien- 
 tific man claims that his hypotheses, put for- 
 ward and intended to be used as a means of 
 directiftg his own observations or experiments, 
 and those of others, is the final truth. It is put 
 up with the expectation that it will be to a 
 great extent demolished, or even perhaps so 
 battered out of shape that it will in the end be 
 hardly recognizable. 
 
 Such, for instacnce, was the idea and the con- 
 duct of the immortal Isaac Newton, the per- 
 fect model of a truly scientific man, in propos- 
 ing the theory of gravitation. He had shown, 
 by a rigorous mathematical demonstration, the 
 most conclusive thing possible, that the laws of 
 Kepler which had been reasonably well proved 
 to explain with great accuracy the motions of 
 some of the planets of our system, and probably 
 those of the rest, could in their turn be ac- 
 counted for by a force emanating from the suu 
 according to the law of gravitation. It was also 
 probable that other bodies beside the sun ex- 
 ercised a similar force according to their masses. 
 Some scientists, if they had had the good luck 
 or the intellectual penetration to arrive at these 
 conclusions, would have unhesitatingly an- 
 nounced as an unquestionable fact what New- 
 ton proposed as a hypotheses, that every parti- 
 
278 The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 cle of matter attracted every other, according to 
 the law of inverse squares which we call gravi- 
 tation. But Newton was not sure, by any 
 means. Because things did not seem to come 
 out quite right in the case of the earth and 
 moon, he concluded that the law of gravitation 
 would not of itself suffice. The difficulty really 
 was, that the size of the earth had not been cor- 
 rectly measured ; but as this was an observed 
 fact, and his idea was only a theory, Newton 
 concluded that the fact was right and the 
 theory at least partially wrong. But some 
 would have taken just the opposite course ; they 
 would have discredited the fact ; they would 
 have said, ' * The fa6t does not agree with the 
 theory; it must be a mistake.*' 
 
 If Newton had felt this sublime confidence in 
 himself, if he had not been so modest, he might 
 have proved his theory a little sooner ; he 
 might have pushed forward the measurements 
 which in the end proved him to be right. But 
 he could afford to wait. He did not care about 
 a personal success ; what he wanted was that 
 the truth should b6 ascertained ; and that 
 would come sooner or later. In the meantime 
 he let his hypothesis stand, as a suggestion 
 that might ultimately be of some service. But 
 he expected that it would of itself be inade- 
 quate to explaii^all the facts. 
 
 Now, I do not mean to say by any means that 
 
The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 279 
 
 there are few scientists of the present day that 
 have Newton's disposition. Perhaps few carry 
 it quite so far ; and it may be better that they 
 should not. But most of them have it sub- 
 stantially. They, at least those of them who 
 are real explorers in science, collect their facts 
 laboriously, and test the theories, which to 
 direct their work they are obliged to make, by 
 means of them ; ready to drop or modify the 
 theories as soon as the facts shall so indicate. 
 
 Exceptions there may be and are to this 
 among them. But the principal reason why so 
 many things are generally believed in the pres- 
 ent day to be discoveries or final conclusions of 
 science which the real investigators and builders 
 of science know are not so, is that there are a 
 number of what may be called second-hand or 
 second-rate men, who in lectures and populaK 
 books make statements of this kind. These 
 men are in the foreground from the popular 
 point of view ; they stand, as it were, at the 
 door of the temple of science, within which its 
 real votaries are hidden. These last are too 
 busy, as a rule, to lecture or write popular 
 books ; and if they did, their language would be 
 so technical that they would hardly be under- 
 stood. It is these middle-men, so to speak, 
 who announce one thing to-day, another to- 
 morrow ; it is they who are mainly responsible 
 for the apparent change and shifting of scien- 
 
28o The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 tific results, which makes some people so dis- 
 trustful of such results nowadays. 
 
 And among these men, there is unfortunately 
 quite a large class, specimens of which may be 
 found even among the workers themselves, who 
 have a prepossession or prejudice against reli- 
 gion ; who seize on, and take special pains to 
 announce, any scientific conclusions, whether 
 final or provisional, which seem to them to be 
 in conflict with Christianity. They dwell on 
 these with great gusto and emphasis ; and take 
 special care to let them soak well into the popu- 
 lar mind. If these results are subsequently 
 modified so as to agree better with the doctrines 
 held, or which they understand to be held, by 
 Christians — as, for example, in the case of the 
 recent trend of scientific research as to the an- 
 tiquity of the human race — this modification is 
 unnoticed or lightly dwelt on by these popular 
 exponents of science, who take all the while the 
 attitude of advocates rather than of impartial 
 judges. 
 
 Well, then, as I have said, the Church has 
 no quarrel with genuine science, with that 
 which is legitimately directed by truly scien- 
 tific methods to the attainment of truth. She 
 cannot have such a quarrel ; for she believes in 
 the truth of what she preaches, and she knows, 
 what all having the use of reason must know, 
 that truth cannot contradict truth. But she has 
 
The Church opposed to Science. 281 
 
 a quarrel with those of whom I have spoken, 
 who anrjounce' as certain truth what they ought 
 ^to know welfhas not been proved to be so. 
 
 Nor does she prohibit any Catholics who are 
 competent to undertake scientific investigation 
 from doing so. She places absolutely no ob- 
 stacle in the way of their penetrating into all 
 the facts of nature as it stands, or of their con- 
 sidering the probable indications as to its past 
 history, or of their weighing actual historical 
 testimony. 
 
 She does, indeed, caution them against being 
 swept away from their moorings to the known 
 truths of religion by the temporary appearances 
 of a science as yet incomplete. She warns them 
 also that in working on certain hypotheses they 
 will be only losing their time. In this she acts 
 as Science herself does. The would-be scientist 
 who insists on re-examining conclusions now 
 solidly established, like those of planetary as- 
 tronomy, is simply looked on by those who are 
 better informed with a s'birug or a smile. His 
 talk is not noticed. 
 
 Also she warns those weak in faith, or intel- 
 lectually incompetent, against venturing on 
 what to them personally might be dangerous 
 ground. And she may also, at certain stages of 
 scitntific inquiry, prohibit the general and in- 
 discriminate reading of scientific works in some 
 particular department, on account of the prac- 
 
^82 The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 tical impossibility of discernment ^t the moment 
 between the false and the true, the doubtful and 
 the certain, the theory and the fact. Scientific 
 men themselves, on purely scientific grounds, 
 may often be of the same mind. It is well, 
 sometimes, for those not competent to judge 
 thoroughly of a subject, to abstain from med- 
 dling with it ; it may do them more harm than 
 good ; give them more false and confused ideas 
 than true and clear ones. Sometimes the words 
 of the poet are specially applicable : * * A little 
 learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or 
 taste not the Pierian spring.'^ 
 
 I have now gone over, as far as space admits, 
 this matter of the so-called conflict between re- 
 ligion and science. The difficulty has been 
 much magnified by some of our scientific 
 friends who want to force an issue. In point of 
 fact, there are not by any means so many even 
 apparent divergences between science and the 
 Catholic religion as they, in their ignorance of 
 the latter, suppose. Evolution, for instance, in 
 quite an extended sense, is not condemned by 
 Catholic dogma ; when you assert that man 
 was developed, soul as well as body, out of a 
 monkey, that is quite another thing. Again, 
 the Church is not committed to believn that the 
 universe, or even this planet, was m^de in six 
 days of twenty-four hours ; nor that Adam lived 
 just exactly so many years ago, M you say 
 
The Church opposed to Science. 283 
 
 the world grew of itself, or that matter existed 
 from all eternity, or that man has been here 
 millions of years ; that again is something quite 
 different. But you notice that these things 
 which the Church cannot accept are nothing 
 more than mere hypotheses or private opinions, 
 not scientific results. 
 
 Of course I cannot undertake here to explain 
 the whole of Catholic dogma on the subjects 
 which may also be discussed by natural science ; 
 but I can tell you that no Catholic scientist 
 well instructed in his religion finds anything 
 in religion or science which tempts him to give 
 up either. 
 
 And there are great numbers of Catholic 
 scientific men, and have been in all ages. 
 Catholics have perhaps not emphasized or culti- 
 vated natural science, in proportion to their 
 numbers, so much as others ; they have more 
 important matters to attend to. But they have 
 by no means neglected it ; if you will look into 
 the matter, you will find that the Church has 
 furnished a great number of its brightest names. 
 
 One word more to those who have a strong- 
 belief in many of the doctrines of Christianity, 
 but differ from us ; to those who are commonly 
 called orthodox Protestants. The scientific 
 enemies of religion do not direct their attacks 
 much against you, for they know that Protes- 
 iantism, on account of its multiplicity and 
 
284 The Church opposed to Science. 
 
 changeableness, cannot commit itself to any- 
 thing ; but they know that if they could beat 
 down or really disprove one tenet of the Catho- 
 lic Church, the whole structure would go to 
 pieces. But let me tell^yQU that there is no 
 danger of that; we are not at all alarmed. The 
 progress of science may disquiet 3'OU and make 
 you think Christianity is untenable ; that the 
 head must abandon it, letting it t^ke its refuge 
 in the heart. But we are not disquieted ; we 
 know that it has never interfered with any of 
 the dogmas of our faith, and that it never will ; 
 and if you were Catholics, you would know the 
 same ; you w^ould know that the Catholic reli- 
 gion will always satisfy the requirements of the * 
 intellect, as well as the cravings and aspirations 
 of the soul. 
 
 There remains however, very probably, an 
 objection in your minds which I will put in 
 definite shape. It is that the Church, by its 
 decrees and definitions, at any rate impedes the 
 freedom of thought ; that :hose who have no 
 faith at all, or those who are at liberty to 
 change their opinions at any time, can pursue 
 scientific study under better conditions, to say 
 the least, than w^e can. This point has already 
 been lightly touched on in this chapter ; but as 
 so much is often made of it, and in other matters 
 beside those relatipg to science, it seems worth 
 while to go into it somewhat more thoroughly. 
 
\ 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 THE CHURCH OPPOSKD TO I.IBKRTY OF 
 THOUGHT. 
 
 THIS is a charge which is very frequently 
 made against the Catholic Church ; more 
 frequently, perhaps, and more uniformly, than 
 any other ; and that even by those who, on the 
 whole, are very well disposed to us. Such a 
 friend will sometimes say : ' ' I certainly envy 
 you Catholics the peace and rest of mind that 
 you enjoy ; it must be a great blessing to have 
 some one who can and will answer for you all 
 these questions which so much disturb all 
 thinking men ; I sometimes wish that I could 
 do as you do, and take the word of old Mother 
 Church for everything ; but I cannot make up 
 my mind to abandon my ^reason and my liberty 
 of thought, for these are greater, better, and 
 nobler things than peace and rest would be.'^ 
 Now, I do not want to use harsh terms, or 
 speak contemptuously of any one ; but I must 
 respectfully submit that this sort of talk, com- 
 mon as it is, and uttered by sensible people too, 
 is really little better than nonsense. And I 
 think, if you will consider the matter patiently 
 for a few moments, you will see that I am right. 
 
 m 
 
286 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 
 
 The word liberty has, and rightly has, an at- 
 tractive sound to all of us ; the idea of liberty 
 is one which we all fondly cherish, especially 
 in a republic like this in which we have the 
 good fortune to live ; it is an idea which we are 
 ready to fight for and to die for. 
 
 But let us look at it more closely, and see 
 why we value liberty, and object to its being 
 restrained. It is because we look on such re- 
 straints as preventing us from acting as reason 
 would dictate, or at least as seems to us best. 
 When we see clearly that a thing is in every 
 way injurious to us, we do not chafe at being 
 prevented from doing it as we otherwise might, 
 through ignorance or inattention. To take a 
 plain example : a street is impassable for a 
 time on account of some excavations which are 
 being made ; the city puts up a barrier at each 
 end of the part under repair, placing a physical 
 obstacle to our going through. We drive up to 
 the place in our carriage, and have to turn back 
 and go some other way. Do we complain ? do 
 we want to have liberty to drive up to the 
 edge of the hole, and perhaps, if it be dark or 
 the horse at all skittish, fall into it ? Well, 
 hardly. 
 
 I think that will do for the matter of liberty 
 of action. Let us now look at that of liberty of 
 thought, which is our special subject just now. 
 And let us take an example here also. 
 
Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 287 
 
 You know, I suppose, that we never see but 
 one side of the moon. There it is month after 
 month, year after year, with the same old fa- 
 miliar markings. If you don't know this, 
 watch it carefully, and you will see that it 
 is so. 
 
 Now, of course the moon has got another 
 side; and we can't help speculating to some 
 exteijt as to how that other side would look, 
 though it really is not of much use to do so, for 
 we have no data to go upon. Still, it is con- 
 ceivable that some such data might at some 
 time be obtained, enough to form some sort of 
 opinion on ; and, if they were, it would surely 
 be very unjust to forbid us from forming such 
 an opinion. 
 
 But now suppose that a way is discovered of 
 actually seeing the other side, like the theoreti- 
 cally possible one given in Jules Verne's trip to 
 the moon, by shooting a projectile round it from 
 the earth, with people in the projectile. Proba- 
 bly we would not all care to make such a 
 trip ; but suppose that quite a number of repu- 
 table citizens had made it, and that some had 
 even taken kodaks with them ; and that their 
 accounts and the photographs which they had 
 taken all agreed. 
 
 Don't you see now that our mental position 
 with regard to the matter has changed ? Spec 
 ulation can no longer be of advantage to us; 
 
^88 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 
 
 and we could rightly be forbidden, on the 
 ground of waste of time, to speculate on a 
 matter which is no longer one of opinion, but 
 of ascertained fact. It has become a thing 
 which we cannot rationally do or desire ; nay, 
 it has become even impossible for us to seri- 
 ously speculate on the subject, or have opinions 
 at all. We are forced, by the very laws of 
 rational nature, to accept the credible- and cer- 
 tain testimony that we have, and stop speculat- 
 ing. Our liberty of thought on this matter has 
 gone. 
 
 Now, this is only a supposed case ; but there 
 are plenty of actual ones in our life all the time. 
 A few years ago it was quite lawful to specu- 
 late as to the sources of the Congo River in 
 Africa; but now that Stanley, and ^ after him 
 quite a number of others have visited them, we 
 have lost our liberty of thought on this sub- 
 ject. 
 
 In fact, every step of the increase of knowl- 
 edge, of which in these latter days we are so 
 justly proud, is a blow at liberty of thought, 
 and a circumscription of it, or a restraint put on 
 it. If we have common sense, we cannot now 
 speculate vaguely as to the distance. of the sun 
 from the earth, or the ratio of the circumference 
 of a circle to its diameter ; for we k7iow that 
 distance with considerable, and that ratio with 
 almost inconceivable, accuracy. These are just 
 
Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 289 
 
 two examples out of thousands which might be 
 given. 
 
 Now one point more. Some things that we 
 know, and cannot speculate about, we know by 
 our own senses and personal investigations ; but 
 a great many, like those which I have just men- 
 tioned, few know in this way. How, then, do 
 we know them ? By the concurrent testimony 
 of competent witnesses or judges. This has 
 created in us a certainty so absolute that, 
 struggle as we may, we cannot, if we are 
 sensible men, get away from it. Contrary ideas 
 may, of course, occur, or we may bring them up 
 voluntarily to our minds; but we cannot suc- 
 ceed in giving any real assent to them, or seri- 
 ously entertaining them as opinions. The lib- 
 erty (5f thought which our forefathers had on 
 these matters is lost to us. 
 
 But you say that the surrender of our reason 
 to reason itself, so to speak, which we make in 
 the instances I have named, and no doubt in 
 many others, is a very different thing from giv- 
 ing it up at the command of the Church. I 
 answer, by no means. This is just where, from 
 lack of thought and knowledge on the subject, 
 you make your mistake. 
 
 Our assent to the teachings of the Church is 
 really an act similar to the assent which both 
 you and we make to Stanley's discoveries in 
 Central Africa. Your mistake about it ari^s 
 
2go Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 
 
 from your not understanding what faith is. 
 You have been so long without it, so long ac- 
 customed in religious matters to give the name 
 of faith to speculation or opinion, that you 
 really have forgotten the meaning of the word. 
 ' Faith really is an assent to testimony ; and it 
 is a rational or common sense act when the 
 testimony is credible and unimpeachable. It is 
 very specially and peculiarly so when the testi- 
 mony is that of Almighty God. 
 
 Now, our belief in the dogmas of the Church 
 is an act just of this character. It is not a 
 bKnd submission or obedience to a command, 
 but an assent to a revelation or a statement of 
 fac^ made to us by none less than God Himself. 
 He informs us on subjects which are beyoiid 
 the reach of our senses or any of our natural 
 faculties ; beyond the reach of all of us, just as 
 many facts of nature or conclusions of mathe- 
 matics, like those which I have mentioned, are 
 beyond the reach of most men. 
 
 **Well," you may rejoin, *'but how do you 
 know that it is God who informs you about 
 these matters? I answer, simply by what we 
 call the evidences of religion. Really very 
 mtich in the same way as you would assure 
 yourself that your informant on astronomical, 
 mathematical, or geographical matters was in 
 fact the authority on these subjects that he 
 claiix^ to be. In the case of religion, setting 
 
Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 291 
 
 i ■ 
 
 aside the direct action of God on the soul in a 
 supernatural way, which raises our act to a su- 
 pernatural plane, the proof is, in the first place, 
 principally by the miracles or signs by which 
 He accompanies His statement. Thus Nicode- 
 mus said to our Lord : Rabbi, we know that 
 thou art a teacher from God ; for no man can do 
 these signs which thou dost, unless God be with 
 Him.*' The miracles of our Lord Himself, of 
 His apostles, and of their followers, continued 
 in the Church, as has been said and is plain to 
 all who will study the evidence, down to the 
 present day, are sufficient in themselves to show 
 us in whose name the Church speaks ; for they 
 are not only wonders, but wonders which bear^ 
 on examination, the stamp of God upon them. ^ 
 We could now, however, almost dispense 
 with these proofs of religion/ The very im- 
 possibility in itself of a merely human institu* 
 lion teaching for nearly two thousand years the 
 same doctrine ; not merely repeating a form of 
 words, but teaching a living system of belief 
 regarding matters unascertainable by reason; 
 answering questions regarding it, often quite 
 complicated and abstruse, and yet never be- 
 trayed, in spite of the personal ignorance of 
 history or theology among its teaching body 
 which has largely existed at various periods 
 and more or less at all times, into a single con- 
 tradiction or inconsistency, is in itself a suffi- 
 
292 church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 
 ~. 1 s 
 
 cient proof that a superhuman wisdom* is guid- 
 ing and directing it. 
 
 Again, the survival of the mere organization 
 of the Church, and the very fact of the obedi- 
 ence, assent, and harmony existing within it, 
 though unaided by material force, in contrast to 
 the insubordination, doubt, and discord which 
 have come into Christian bodies separated from 
 it, are in themselves a strong proof to many. 
 
 Well, now, say, if you please, that our evi- 
 dence is not as good as we think ; the fact re- 
 mains that we believe because we are con- 
 vinced, not on account of any external pressure* 
 But now, perhaps, you resume : This may be 
 all very well for the learned and intelligent ; but 
 how are these considerations which you have 
 named an argument for the common people who 
 have not much reasoning ability?" ' I think 
 5 0U may possibly make this objection ; but still 
 if you do, I am a little surprised. For I under- 
 stood that you were one of the persons who had 
 reasoning ability, and that your ob}eiction was 
 in the beginning that you did not want to 
 abandon it. I thought it only applied to think- 
 ing men. If one has not got much use of rea- 
 son, certainly it is not a tyranny that he should 
 be taught by others who have. No one says 
 that it is subjecting a child to a mental slavery 
 when we teach him his alphabet ; the child, no 
 doubt, may complain that his liberty is re- 
 
church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 293 
 
 stricted by the process, but it is not his liberty 
 of thought that worries him. He may say that 
 he wants to play, but he does not say : Never 
 mind about teaching me ; I can find out all this 
 by myself ; or if perchance he does say it, he 
 does not know what he is talking about. * 
 
 In the same way, then, as we teach a child 
 the alphabet we teach him religion ; just as you 
 teach him geography, because yoii know it is 
 true. But we do not want to keep him down to 
 an abject belief in us as liis instructors. We 
 want him, we want all Catholics, so far as in 
 them lies — and all other people too, for the mat» 
 ter of that — ^to study these evidences of religion. - 
 That is precisely what our Christian schools are 
 for ; to make all our people believe in their re* 
 ligion intelligently,' instead of taking it for 
 granted. We want that any restrictions there 
 are on their liberty of thought should be such 
 as they themselves see are necessary for a rea* 
 sonable being. ' ' ^ ' 
 
 We do not, of course, want that their heads 
 should be stuffed full of statements which we 
 know are false, or that doubts which they have 
 not the means of 'settling should be put into 
 their minds as to what we know is true. But 
 in this ipve act just as you do about secular 
 knowledge. You do not want false or inaccu^ 
 rate text-books ; you do not put two histories, 
 one correctj the other full of errors, before 
 
^94 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 
 
 students, for them to take whicliever they 
 choose. C 
 
 In short, there is nothing in our action in this 
 whple matter different from yours, except what 
 comes from the fact that in religion we are sure 
 about the truth, w^hile you are doubtful. If 
 Bible Christians agreed about the sense of the 
 Bible as we do about the Catholic faith ; if their 
 Word of God was really a practical and avail- 
 able Word of God to them, clearly settled and 
 demonstrated, as ours is to us, they would con- 
 sider liberty of thought about it a mistake, and 
 a dangerous one, as it is, more or less according 
 to the importance of the subject, about all 
 things which are really known and definitely 
 ascertained. On such matters there is no 
 advantage in surmising or guessing; one is 
 much better off to know the truth at once. 
 And we Catholics know and admit this obvious 
 piece of common sense ; and the more intelli- 
 gent a Catholic may be, the more clearly he 
 see^ it. - ' ' 
 
 Therefore, do not fancy that Catholics are 
 chafing and fretting secretly over their inability 
 to indulge in religious speculations. There is, 
 in fact, no occasion for them to do so, if they are 
 fond of this sort of mental occupation ; for there 
 are a vast number of points on which they are 
 quite free to form opinions ; which are not set- 
 tled by the Church, and which in all proba- 
 
Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 295 
 
 bility form no part of the faith, and therefore 
 never will be so settled. The number of such 
 points is probably practically greater for us 
 than it is for you. The fixing of the funda<^ 
 mental principles, or indeed the determination 
 of any of the laws of any science, always opens 
 up a number of questions which otherwise 
 would not be thought of ; and what is true of 
 sciences in general is true of theology in par- 
 ticular. If one is always worrying about first 
 principles, which necessarily are comparatively 
 few, one never gets any further, and has his 
 mental range much restricted. 
 
 But you should not imagine, as is indeed plain 
 from what has been said, that Catholics have to 
 be always struggh'ng to stifle tneir doubts about 
 those matters which do belong to faith, and 
 have been definitely settled. They do not have 
 to do so, any more than you have to about the 
 matter of some science with which you may be 
 somewhat imperfectly acquainted. They know 
 that they can study up the matter of religion in 
 correct and profound treatises, if they like, just 
 as matters of science can be studied. But they 
 feel quite confident of their faith without doing 
 so, just as you do, though you may not be a 
 man of science, about the determined laws of 
 astronomy or chemistry. And they feel no 
 more need to study the works of Protestants 
 or infidels to obtain information about religion 
 
296 Church opposed to Liberty of TJtought. 
 
 than you do to read the pamphlet of some 
 would-be astronomer who thinks he has 
 smashed gravitation to pieces, and refuted 
 Newton or Laplace ; non- Catholic speculations 
 about religion are to an intelligent Catholic 
 simply unscientific trash. 
 
 That is to say, they feel and act in this way 
 unless they have some private reason for hoping 
 that the faith might not be true. They know, 
 of course, that it is a restraint, not on their in- 
 tellect but on their passions ; for any religion 
 coming from God must necessarily be this. 
 And this restraint, indeed, may cause some 
 chafing and fretting. It is our unvarying ex- 
 perience that Catholics do not look out for argu- 
 ments against their religion unless they wish to 
 escape from its control 171 this respect ; or, what 
 comes to the same thing, unless they want to 
 enjoy some temporal good which cannot be 
 gained without renouncing their faith. Of 
 course I can hardly expect you to believe that 
 I am right in this ; but it is true, all the same. 
 It is not merely a conclusion of theory ; it is a 
 result of observ^ation. 
 
 It may 6e noticed that the charges discussed 
 in these two chapters are, strangely enough, 
 directly opposed to each other. The charge 
 that the Church is opposed to science is really 
 that she is opposed to that which itself prevents 
 liberty of thought by giving us certain informa- 
 
Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 297 
 
 tiou. It may be said, however, that she desires 
 liberty of thought on some matters, but forbids 
 it on others. This is true, but not in the sense 
 in which it is intended. She forbids, as against 
 reason, common sense, and the welfare of man, 
 liberty of thought on matters, whether in the 
 material or spiritual order, which have been 
 clearly demonstilited and definitely ascertained ; 
 she refuses to abandon it on those which are 
 still open to reasonable question, as is the case 
 with certain scientific hypotheses not as yet 
 proved. You may disagree with her in your 
 judgment of what is certain and what is doubt- 
 ful ; but except for this, there is no difference 
 between her action and your own. 
 
CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 CATHOI.IC CHURCH OPPOSKD tO t^REK 
 INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 IT is a charge very commonly made against 
 the Church, that she is opposed to free in- 
 stitutions. This charge, the truth of which is 
 usually simply taken for granted, is one which 
 naturally prejudices Americans more against 
 her than any other which could be made. For 
 Americans, as a rule, are most profoundly at- 
 tached to the free institutions under which they 
 live, and most absolutely convinced that de- 
 mocracy is better than monarchy or aristocjracy 
 in any form. 
 
 Now, I say the truth of this most injurious 
 charge against the Church is usually simply 
 taken for granted. But surely such a proceed- 
 ing is far from being fair. I should like to 
 have a reason given for it ; and shall try, there- 
 fore, to find out what reasons there are likely 
 to be. 
 
 The most obvious one seems to be that the 
 government of the Church is itself monarch- 
 ical. This statement is true, in a certain 
 sense, no doubt. The Pope is unquestion- 
 ably the supreme authority in matters of 
 398 
 
The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 299 
 
 faith and morals ; that is, his consent is neces« 
 sary and sufficient to establish the truth in con- 
 troverted questions on these subjects. This 
 authority is, however, rarely exercised ; and 
 when it is, it is usually merely to place beyond 
 controversy a point already very nearly settled 
 by the popular voice. So that here, after all, 
 we very rarely have any strain put on out 
 minds by obedience to his infallible decision. 
 
 Then again, it is true that in matters of dis- 
 cipline the Pope is the supreme legislator. He 
 has absolute control over all inferior legislators 
 in the Church ; he can reform or abrogate laws 
 made by bishops in their dioceses, if it seems tO 
 him expedient to do so ; and he can make laws 
 for the universal Church which are binding 
 without the consent of his inferiors. But here 
 again, such action on his part is very rare. 
 Outside of the matter of the rubrics — that is, of 
 the prayers or ceremonies of public worship — • 
 legislation of this kind is unusual, as is also 
 interference with the action of his subordinates. 
 The fact is, that both their action and his are 
 usually simply in accordance with fixed tra- 
 ditional principles, modified more or less ac- 
 cording to the circumstances of particular 
 times or places ; with which those living on the 
 spot are generally supposed to be best ac- 
 quainted. 
 
 In point of fact, then, Rome legislates very 
 
300 The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 
 
 little, for the very simple reason that there is 
 very little need that she should do so. The 
 work of the Church proceeds on its regular lines 
 throughout the world mainly by means of the 
 zeal and energy of the clergy, and of the laity 
 co-operating with them ; and it is seldom that 
 this needs to be specially directed or controlled. 
 The idea, so common among Protestants, that 
 everything done by Catholics is done by virtue 
 of secret orders from Rome, is simply ludicrous 
 to those at all acquainted with the actual state 
 of things. In reality, Rome seldom initiates ; 
 as a rule she merely sanctions or allows ; some- 
 times she checks or restrains, or perhaps for- 
 bids. For example, take the case of the found- 
 ing of a new religious order or community, by 
 which we mean such as the Jesuits, Dominicans, 
 or Franciscans, or numbers of others less nota- 
 ble or conspicuous. The first idea of an order 
 like this is formed by some priest or even lay- 
 man, having no special authority in the Church ; 
 he associates with himself some friends and 
 sympathizers, and they form a little society, 
 with the permission, probably, of the iJishop of 
 the diocese. After some years, especially if the 
 society has grown and been established in 
 various dioceses, the approval of Rome may be 
 asked ; but it takes some time to obtain it. 
 Meanwhile the association or order goes on do- 
 ing the work for which it was established, very 
 
The Church opposed to Free Institutions, yyt 
 
 much as it would if there were no Pope at all to 
 aay anything about it. The definite Papal ap- 
 proval is, of course, a great thing for it ; but 
 its real success or failure depends principally on 
 the zeal and virtue of its members ; Roi^e 
 simply waits to see if it has the elements of life 
 and strength in it ; it does not undertake to 
 give these to it, or to establish by its decrees 
 what would not otherwise exist. 
 
 What is true of great matters is also true of 
 lesser ones. Any one familiar with the practi- 
 cal working of the Church knows that it is very 
 far from being in practice a strong centralized 
 government, the pressure of which is felt con- 
 tinually throughout its dominions ; still farther 
 from being a military organization, every part 
 of which acts by orders from headquarters^ 
 
 Of course I know it will be hard for many to 
 believe this ; and it is, of course, impossible to 
 prove the truth of what I say about a matter of 
 this kind to those who are not willing to believe 
 it. It is, indeed, only by being a Catholic that 
 one can fully understand -and realize these 
 things. I must content myself with simply 
 stating facts. 
 
 If you ask why the government of the 
 Church should be monarchical, the answer 
 seems evident enough. It is plain, in the first 
 placi, with regard to matters of faiih, that the^ 
 amount of supernatural assistance required is 
 
20^ The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 
 
 much less on this system than on any other 
 vvhich could be devised; and secondly, with 
 regard to matters of discipline, as the general 
 government is mainly occupied, not with mak- 
 ing general laws, but with the decision of par- 
 ticular questions, a representative government 
 would be intolerably cumbrous and incon- 
 venient. It would be much the same as if for 
 the business of the Supreme Court it were 
 necessary to hold a convention of all the 
 lawyers in the country. When any important 
 changes are to be made in the general laws of 
 the Church, it is customary to convoke a gen- 
 eral council ; but this seldom needs to be done. 
 
 So much, then, for the monarchical constitu- 
 tion of the Church itself. But another argu- 
 ment is often made to show that the Church 
 sympathizes with monarchy in general, and i? 
 opposed to free institutions ; namely, that th^^ 
 Church has been generally allied with mon*» 
 archies in actual history. 
 
 This is again true as a statement of fact ; but 
 when we come to look at it, it really has no 
 significance. For it simply comes from two 
 causes, neither of which can justly be a ground 
 of complaint against the Church. The first is 
 that the Church has always been a supporter of 
 legitimate government, and opposed to anarchy ; 
 the Church, from the days of our I/Ord HiiAselft 
 who said, Render unto Csesar the things 
 
The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 303 
 
 which are Csesar^s/' has always upheld and 
 sanctioned the authority of the State. The 
 second is that most governments have been 
 monarchical; so that in supporting govern- 
 ment, it has usually supported monarchy neces* 
 sarily. But the Church has always recognized 
 and supported popular governments where they 
 existed. It has supported monarchy as a rule, 
 simply because, as a rule, there was nothing 
 else to support. 
 
 Where the reigning family has in any partic- 
 ular country been strongly Catholic, the Church 
 has no doubt at some times preferred to trust to 
 it than to venture the experiment of republican- 
 ism, particularly where the republic was found- 
 ed, like the first one in France, on_princi- 
 ples opposed to religion ; and it is quite natural 
 that individual Catholics should generally have 
 taken the same view of the case. . And, un- 
 doubtedly, the Church has sometimes suffered 
 and brought itself into a subjection injurious to 
 its own freedom by putting its trust too much in 
 princes, allowing them, in return for their pro- 
 tection, too much interference in ecclesiastical 
 affairs. But all this has been from no prefer- 
 ence for monarchy in itself. 
 
 The Church undoubtedly prefers that a na- 
 tion should be Catholic rather than Protestant 
 or infidel ; she also prefers that its government 
 should be Catholic; that is, that it should 
 
304 The Church opposed to Free Imtitutions. 
 
 legislate in accordance with the principles of 
 Catholic morality, which, rightly understood, 
 commend themselves to the common sense of 
 mankind. She also desires that the Catholic 
 religion should be allowed uts free exercise, 
 But>though she evidently cannot regard it as 
 beneficial that error should also be allowed free 
 course, experience has shown that invoking the 
 arm of the State to repress it, except where it 
 is evidently contrary to the peace and the 
 temporal welfare of the State itself, is likely 
 to do more harm than good, both by making 
 religion itself odious, and also, as has been 
 said, by putting religion itself in a subjection 
 to the temporal authority in return for the pro- 
 tection and aid afforded by the latter. 
 I She is, therefore, thoroughly in favor of a 
 government like that under which we have the 
 good fortune to live ; a government which con- 
 fines itself to its own proper business of provid- 
 ing for those things which concern the temporal 
 welfare of its citizens. She does not regard it, 
 of course, as being the best possible govern- 
 ment in its actual legislation, any more than 
 she regards its citizens, the authors of that 
 legislation, as the best or wisest men possible ; 
 she cannot but see that it makes mistakes, 
 and labors under false impressions, particularly 
 with regard to herself, her pwn aims and in- 
 tentions. She also knows that true belief iu 
 
The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 305 
 
 matters of doctrine has a more intimate con* 
 nection with right principles of public and 
 private life than is generally supposed ; and 
 that, for want of thorough Christian knowledge 
 and instruction, the temporal welfare and 
 happiness of the people is not so efiectually 
 secured as it might be. But she does not wish 
 to secure for the American people the advan- 
 tages of the truth which she possesses by force, 
 trickery, or conspiracy ; but only by the legiti- 
 mate means which American citizenship places 
 in the hands of all. She regards these means 
 and this citizenship as the best hope which any 
 country can have for its future. 
 
 Catholics desire the conversion of this coun- 
 try to the Catholic faith ; that is a matter of 
 course. So Methodists, Baptists, or Presby- 
 terians must necessarily desire its conversion 
 to their own respective ways of thinking. No 
 charge should, therefore, be made against us on 
 this head. But shonldwe be successful in this, 
 we do not desire to tyrannize over those who 
 may still differ from. us. We do not wish to 
 change our form of government, or to establish 
 the Catholic religion, making nonconformity 
 with it an offence. But no one could rightly 
 blame a Catholic majority for making laws by 
 which, for instance, the proper respect for the 
 Divine institution of marriage should be more 
 fully seeuFed- If infidels are not considered 
 
3o6 The Church opposed to Free Instttuttons7\^ 
 
 disloyal to our free institutions for trying to 
 break this down, how can Catholics be so con- 
 sidered for endeavoring to build it up ? Or if a 
 Catholic majority should believe that some 
 special measures needed to be taken for sup- 
 pressing the evils of intemperance, and should 
 vote such measures, as Catholics would do now 
 If they followed the direction of their pastors, 
 could such a proceeding be considered as 
 bigoted, intolerant, or contrary to the principles 
 of American liberty ? » , 
 
 I know that many, perhaps most non-Catho* 
 lies, will say: This all sounds well enough; 
 but organizations, as well as individuals, must 
 be judged, riot by their professions, but by 
 their actions. History shows that Catholics 
 have always persecuted those opposed to them, 
 and persecuted them simply as such, whenever 
 it was in their power to do so. And what they 
 have done we believe they will do again." 
 
 This charge is a very common and a very 
 weighty one in the minds of most Protestants* 
 It deserves a special examination. 
 
CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 PERSECUTION. 
 
 PERSECUTION is considered by the aver- 
 age Protestant as something specially 
 characteristic of the Catholic Church. He con- 
 siders it so obvious that the Catholic Church 
 always persecutes heretics when she gets a 
 chance, that it is hardly worth while to make 
 any attempt to prove it. But if proof is called 
 for, surely ** Bloody Mary*' and the Spanish 
 Inquisition are quite sufficient to settle the 
 question. 
 
 But in fact the question is one which cannot 
 be settled in any such summary manner. Be- 
 fore we can arrive at any sound conclusions, or 
 even think or talk reasonably on the subject, 
 we must understand just what is meant by per- 
 secution, and how far or in what cases we can 
 reasonably object to it. 
 
 No one, I presume, objects to the persecution 
 of burglars or murderers except those who are, 
 or are likely to be, the objects of such perse- 
 cution. Society has well- formed and settled 
 views, not only as to the immorality of burglary 
 and murder, but also as to their inconsistency 
 with the peace and welfare of the state. a 
 
 397 
 
3o8 
 
 Persecution. 
 
 rule, it contents itself with the perseqution or 
 punishment of the overt act, and it accom- 
 plishes its end sufficiently well by so doing ; for 
 burglars or assassins are not inclined to make 
 profession openly of their purposes, or to incite 
 others publicly to imitate their example. 
 
 But even in this may we not have, in a certain 
 sense, persecution for opinion's sake ? Sup- 
 pose that a man holds that, according to his re- 
 * ligion or conscience, the sacrifice of human life 
 is necessary. That such doctrines are held as 
 religious creeds by considerable numbers of 
 men, is well known. Would not a civilized 
 government acquiring' control of a country 
 where such views were held be obliged to put 
 them down by the strong hand — to persecute 
 and severely punish those who should act out 
 their convictions in this respect ? And yet the 
 victim of such persecution might truly allege 
 that, according to his creed,' the taking of life in 
 the case in which he was punished for it was a 
 matter of the highest obligation, most necessary 
 not only for his own salvation but for that also 
 of the one whose life he had taken. 
 
 It cannot be said that holding such doctrines 
 is a mark of insanity, and that insane persons 
 form an exception to ordinary rules; for one 
 cannot believe whofe nations to be insane. 
 
 But we will take a more practical case ; one 
 nearer home. Surely, there are plenty of peo- 
 
Persecution. 309 
 
 , . I - ■ ■ -— ■ »■ ■ ■< 
 
 pie, not considered insane, who hold that a man, 
 at least if no one is depending on him for sup- 
 port, has a right to take his own life. It is 
 hard to^prove that this conviction is unreason- 
 able, or that this view is a mistaken one, unless 
 by the aid of religion ; and if the would-be 
 suicide does not admit the teachings of your 
 religion, it is practically impossible to persuade 
 him of his error, which- may amount to a reli- 
 gious conviction with him. Nevertheless, laws 
 have been passed, and now exist, making at- 
 tempted suicide a punishable offence ; and we 
 do not find that such laws are considered to" 
 savor of intolerance or persecution. And yet 
 clearly by them we punish men for acting out 
 their conscientious convictions, or what may 
 be presumed to be such ; as in the case of the 
 Mormons. ^ 
 
 But you say, What we mean by persecution 
 is persecution, not for action's but for opinion's 
 sake. As you have said, the civilized state 
 contents itself with punishing the overt act." 
 
 ^ad you not better wait a minute, and see if 
 you are not going jtoo far in this definition of 
 persecution which you have given? For my 
 part, I do not see very well how any one can be 
 persecuted merely for an opinion, unless we 
 bring a mind-reader as witness against him. 
 What is meant by the loose phrase * * persecu- 
 tion for opinioti's s^ke/' means really persecu- 
 
310 Persecution. 
 
 tion for giving^ utterance to an opinion; for 
 that is the only thing which testimony is com- 
 petent to prove. An opinion which remains 
 locked up in a man's breast, unbetrayed by 
 word or sign, never was persecuted, because it 
 cannot be. It is only the manifestation of 
 opinion which can be punished ; though this 
 manifestation may be negative, as we may say, 
 or simply recusancy ; an omission of certain 
 acts or certain formulas which would be cheer- 
 fully performed or subscribed by those holding 
 the opinions legally recognized as correct. 
 
 But, in point of fact, most of the religious 
 persecution which has been instituted, at least 
 by Catholic states, has been for the open utter* 
 ance of heretical opinions, generally accom- 
 panied by the endeavor to persuade others also 
 to embrace them. Those who ha^ie made no 
 attempt to propagate their opinions have gen* 
 erally been unmolested. 
 
 Now, are we prepared to say that free utter- 
 ance and propagation of opinions which the 
 people in general, and the authorities which as 
 a rule represent their view3, consider as dan- 
 gerous to the general welfare, should always be 
 allowed? We have, I know, tried to maintain 
 the right of free speech and a free press ; still 
 we have always drawn the line at the publica- 
 tion of evidently indecent and immoral litera- 
 ture, and should undoubtedly draw it, had we 
 
Persecution. 31 1 
 
 u 
 
 'occasion, at the public giving out of matter of 
 jthis kind by word of mouth. I am inclined to 
 think, also, that it is only because infidelity has 
 lately become quite common, that public blas- 
 phemy against all that Christians hold sacred is 
 tolerated among us. Even now it is not in all 
 parts of the country ; and when it is not, this is 
 not stigmatized as persecution. - ■ ^ 
 Furthermore, we are lately beginning to see 
 that some stop must be put to the open publi- 
 cation of opinions which are essentially sub- 
 versive of all social order and peace. A man 
 may hold in his own mind the idea that ** prop- 
 erty is theft," that the private ownership of 
 anything is an outrage on humanity ; that can- 
 not be helped or punished. But if he under- 
 takes to ventilate this doctrine on a public plat- 
 form, especially if his doing so is equivalent to 
 a positive incitement to his hearers to steal or 
 destroy the goods of others, the state has as 
 much right to interfere with his action as if he 
 personally undertook such stealing or destruc- 
 tion. Or a man may entertain the opinion that 
 all government is intolerable, that every one 
 must be free to do exactly what he pleases; 
 that we cannot interfere with. But if he col- 
 lects a body of hearers -about him, and en- 
 deavors to form them into a mob for resistance 
 to lawful authority, there is no reason why his 
 freedom of speech should not be as much r©- 
 
312 Persecution. 
 
 Strained as his freecjom of action would be 
 should he begin to act on his own part in de* 
 fiance of the law of the land. 
 
 I think, then, it can hardly be deniM that it 
 is in the competency of the state to prevent and 
 to punish the open expression of dangerous 
 opinions. If that is conceded, we have the 
 whole essential idea of persecution as one that 
 cannot be condemned as unreasonable or cruel. 
 Every state must for its own preservation 
 sometimes persecute, not for the mere holding 
 of an opinion, but for its open expression. 
 
 We are therefore obliged to confess that if we 
 condemn persecution for the sake of religion — • 
 that is to say, the punishment of the open ex- 
 pression and propagation of religious opinions, 
 it must be either because such opinions cannot 
 be considered as dangerous to the welfare of 
 society, or because the punishment will be in- 
 effectual, only increasing the evil it is intended 
 to remove, or because it is of an excessive or 
 barbarous character, going farther than is nec- 
 essary to accomplish the result which is re- 
 quired. 
 
 It is really for the first of these reasons main- 
 ly that persecution is now generally held to be 
 unjustifiable. This, then, I shall principally 
 examine, as follows: * 
 
 An opinion cannot, of course, be con° 
 sidered dangerous to the social welfare if it 
 
Persecution. 313 
 
 fs considered by the community in general as 
 being quite probably true, or if it is one which 
 has no perceptible connection with the moral 
 character or the material prosperity of man. 
 On the first of these grounds ordinary political 
 theories cannot be considered fit matters for 
 legal repression ; on the second, most of the 
 speculations which might be put forward in ab- 
 stract physical science, however absurd they 
 may evidently be, must, of course, be indul- 
 gently tolerated. 1 
 
 It is on both these grounds that the persecu-' 
 tion of religious opinions is now generally 
 reprobated. The double notion is now gen- 
 erally abroad, first, that truth in matters of 
 religion, even perhaps with regard to the very 
 existence of God Himself, is unattainable, so 
 that any view which a man holds about them 
 is merely a speculation; and, secondly, that 
 religious opinions, properly so called, have no 
 connection with morality or the well-ordered 
 life of the social body. 
 
 On these premises, of course, it is therefore 
 perfectly reasonable that persecution should be 
 reprobated. But the difficulty is that the pre- 
 niises themselves cannot be considered as well 
 taken. The first begs the question as to the 
 existence of certain evidence for religious 
 truth The second is utterly absurd, as has 
 been previously shown. A single . instance 
 
314 
 
 Persecution. 
 
 will show its absurdity. A man may believe 
 in a God who sanctions and commands what 
 the common sense of mankind regards as a 
 crime. His belief is a religious opinion ; but 
 it is one like in every respect to those before 
 instanced, of absolute communism and anar- 
 chy, to which the state cannot be indifferent. 
 
 Now, let us see what the application of this 
 is to the persecutions which Catholic states 
 have instituted. The circumstances, as a rule, 
 have been that a body of men, or individuals 
 here and there, have openly proclaimed and en- 
 deavored to propagate opinions which, rightly 
 or wrongly, were held, not only by the gov- 
 ernment of the state, but also by the great 
 mass of the people, as being the denial of 
 truths most necessary to the holy life of the 
 individual, and by means of that to the sta- 
 bility, peace, and prosperity of the state. 
 Catholics know, for example, perfectly well 
 that if the people of a Catholic nation were 
 persuaded of the truth of the Protestant doc- 
 trine as originally enunciated, to the effect that 
 aio sins would be imputed to one who had faith 
 in Christ, the door would be at once opened to 
 vice and disorder of every kind, as Luther and 
 others of the original Reformers sorrowfully 
 confess it was. " The world," says lyUther in 
 his Table Talk, grows worse and worse, and 
 becomes more wicked every day. Men arr now 
 
Persecution 
 
 315 
 
 more given to revenge, more avaricious, more 
 devoid of mercy, less modest, and more incor- 
 rigible; in fine, more wicked than in the Pa- 
 pacy.'* And in another place: **One thing 
 no less astonishing than scandalous is, to see 
 that since the pure doctrine of the gospel has 
 been brought to light, the world daily goes 
 from bad to worse/' Bucer confesses that 
 **the greater part of the people seem to have 
 embraced the gospel only to shake off the 
 yoke of discipline, and the obligation of fast- 
 ing, penances, etc., which lay upon them in the 
 time of popery, and to live at their pleasure, 
 enjoying their lust and lawless appetite without 
 control." Calvin says: **The pastors, yes, 
 the pastors themselves who mount the pulpit 
 . . . are at the present time the most 
 shameful examples of waywardness and other 
 vices," -^--r?^r- 
 
 I do not mean to say that these disorders 
 everywhere visibly mark out Protestant nations 
 from Catholic ones ; they do not, and for two 
 reasons. First, Catholics, as a rule, hardly live 
 up to their faith, or, as we say, do not fully 
 practise their religion ; secondly, common sense, 
 natural virtue, and the grace of God as well, 
 have done much to correct the original Protest- 
 ant doctrine, and to repair the wreck which it 
 made. But the principle holds good that a 
 religious doctrine may necessarily and obvi- 
 
3i6 
 
 Persecution, 
 
 ously lead to results not only immoral, but 
 such as shake the whole framework of society. 
 
 In some cases its effect may be immediate, 
 being directly aimed at the social order itself. 
 Such, for instance, is one of the propositions of 
 Wickliffe to the effect that no man can have 
 legitimate authority, either in the State or the 
 Church, while he is in the state of mortal sin. 
 This, of course, practically exempts every one 
 from obedience to any superior, secular or reli- 
 gious, whose character he does not approve, 
 and destroys the whole constitution of society 
 at one blow. And yet it is a religious proposi- 
 tion; for it evidently means to recognize au- 
 thority as coming from God, and to deny it to 
 those who are not in His favor. 
 
 Now, can any one say that a Catholic state, 
 or any state whatever for the matter of that, 
 can calmly tolerate the dissemination of propo- 
 sitions of this kind ? If it cannot, the persecu- 
 tions of history are not without some just war- 
 rant. ' 
 
 To all this it must be added that it was not 
 always simply the expression or propagation of 
 opinion which has provoked persecution from 
 Catholic states. I^awless acts of outrage and 
 insult to what was most reverenced by the mass 
 'of the people were sometimes committed. Even 
 now and in this country we have laws prohibit- 
 ing and punishing the disturbance of religious 
 
Persecution. 
 
 3^7 
 
 worship ; why, then, should our ancestors not 
 punish those who were guilty of this and much 
 more? 
 
 We picture to ourselves those cruel Papists 
 seizing and burning at the stake a man who 
 was simply worshipping God in peace and pri- 
 vacy according to the dictates of his con- 
 science ; but really this was not the usual 
 case. 
 
 I do not say it has never occurred ; nor, what 
 comes to about the same thing, that actual con- 
 formity has not been required to a religion in 
 which one did not believe. But if these things 
 have been notably exemplified anywhere, they 
 were in the Protestant persecutions under Eliza- 
 beth and her successors, where Catholics were 
 subjected to heavy penalties and placed under 
 legal disabilities for refusing to attend a wor- 
 ship in which they could not conscientiously 
 join; and priests were hung, drawn, and quar- 
 tered for saying Mass even in private houses 
 with the utmost seclusion, or indeed even for 
 being priests. It was pretended that this was 
 on account of treason ; that the fact of a priest 
 entering England from foreign parts was a suffi- 
 cient proof of treasonable design ; but the hol- 
 lo wness of the pretence was often shown by the 
 offer of pardon on the condition of apostasy. 
 
 I do not deny, however, that there was in 
 th^ Protestant English persecutions, long-cou- 
 
3i8 
 
 Persecution. 
 
 tinned and bloody as they were, a genuine 
 though unfounded scare about danger to the 
 state from Catholics. The fact really is that 
 in almost, if not quite all the persecutions of 
 history, including those of the early Christians 
 under pagan Rome, this has been the strong 
 and principal motive. The Romans were will- 
 ing enough to tolerate any religion unless they 
 thought it threatened the peace of the state and 
 the authority of the emperors ; and this has 
 been the cause of persecution at other times as 
 well, rather than simple religious rancor. It is 
 Catholic or Protestant states, as a rule, that 
 have persecuted, rather than Catholic or Prot- 
 estant churches. The Spanish Inquisition, the 
 great bugbear of Protestants and one of their 
 great arguments against Catholicity, was spe- 
 cially a work of the state, against the severity 
 of which Rome constantly protested. 
 
 That there may be, however, a fear, more or 
 less reasonable, justifying a state in what may 
 be properly called persecution on religious 
 grounds, seems to be quite undeniable ; and, 
 of course, a nation holding a false faith is justi- 
 fied in conscience in persecuting as much as 
 one holding a true, faith, if it believes its faith 
 to be true. 
 
 Let us now briefly notice the second and third 
 of the reasons against persecution first given. 
 As to the second, no doubt opinion has changed 
 
Persecution. 
 
 much in recent times as to whether it is expedient 
 in many cases in which it is obviously justifi- 
 able. This is just the puzzle at the present day 
 with regard to anarchistic doctrines. Persecu- 
 tion to some extent seems absolutely necessary ; 
 but the question is, Will it not rather fan the 
 flame than extinguish it? 
 
 As to the third, we probably all admit that 
 indignation is justly excited against the per- 
 secutions of former times- on account of what 
 certainly seems to us their needlessly cruel 
 and barbarous character. But we must re- 
 member that they did not seem so to the 
 people of those times. What would be in 
 our judgment most cruel and atrocious punish- 
 ments were constantly used then for all grave 
 crimes ; and false belief was then considered by 
 both Catholics and Protestants to be the great- 
 est and most dangerous of all crimes. But the 
 degree or severity of the punishment does not 
 really enter at all into the principle of the 
 thing. If persecution for religion's sake is 
 really wrong in principle, it is as certainly 
 wrong to fine a man a dollar for non-con- 
 formity to the state religion as to burn him at 
 the stake. 
 
 Now, to look at the thing in a practical light, 
 as the* matter is to-day in this country and in 
 the world in general. Judging from any indi- 
 cations which we have at the present time, 
 
326 
 
 Persecution. 
 
 there can be little question that Catholics are 
 far more tolerant toward Protestants than Pro- 
 testants are toward them. That is notably the 
 case right here among us ; you will seldom see 
 any signs in this country of hatred on the part 
 of Catholics for Protestants ; that of Protestants 
 for Catholics is manifested continually. We do 
 not altogether set this down to malice, however. 
 It is plain that it is for the most part caused by 
 the dense ignorance, wilful, it is true, to some 
 extent, but still ignorance all the same, which 
 still prevails among Protestants regarding the 
 Catholic faith. And on the basis of this ignor- 
 ance, the hatred becomes more or less excus- 
 able. If our beliefs and practices were really 
 what most Protestants still insist on believing 
 them to be, in spite of the most earnest and 
 often repeated denials on our part; if even a 
 tenth part of the old calumnies which they are 
 continually handing down from generation to 
 generation against us were true, there would 
 really be ground for believing us to be danger- 
 ous enemies to society and to the moral, intel- 
 lectual, and material progress of humanity. 
 
 We have no desire, and cannot very well 
 have any, to persecute our countrymen ; for this 
 reason, even were there no others, that they are 
 not, as a rule, wilful apostates from the known 
 truth, but rather sufferers from a darkness and 
 mental confusion coming down to them from 
 
The Catholic Laws of Marriage. yi\ 
 
 their ancestors ; and I heartily agree with the. 
 wish of Cardinal Gibbons **that religious in» 
 tolerance may never take root in our favored 
 land ; may the only king to force our conscience 
 be the King of Kings; may the only prison erected 
 among us for the sin of unbelief or misbelief be 
 the prison of a troubled conscience, and may 
 our only motive for embracing truth be not the 
 fear of man but the love of truth and of God.** 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 THE CATHOLIC LAWS OF MARRIAGE. 
 
 T HAVE spoken in the last chapter but one of 
 the belief of the Catholic Church on the 
 subject of marriage, and of the legislation she 
 would desire in this matter. It will be well to 
 explain this more fully; for many misapprehen- 
 sions exist regarding it. 
 
 Those who are not Christians may naturally 
 consider themselves free to speculate, and to 
 legislate as far as possible on this matter, with- 
 out admitting any end to be secured by it ex- 
 cept merely natural well-being, or any guide or 
 light regarding it except that which is furnished 
 by human reason. But Christians, at least 
 those who believe, as the vast majority of 
 Christians do, in the teaching of the Bible, who 
 recoagnize the words of Christ and His postles 
 
322 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 as there recorded as being really the Word of 
 God, cannot stand on this ground. They must 
 and do believe marriage to be a Divine institu- 
 tion, which man is not at liberty to tamper with 
 according to his own will or fancy. And as the 
 legislation of nations having a considerable 
 Christian population may at the present day 
 easily fall into the hands of unbelievers, there 
 is evidently a probability hereof such legisla- 
 tion being contrary to the Christian conscience, 
 and therefore such that it cannot be recognized 
 or obeyed by Christians. No Christian, indeed 
 no sincere believer in any religion, nay, more, 
 no genuinely conscientious man, can always 
 recognize human legislation as supreme or be- 
 yond appeal. 
 
 And there is no matter on which a conflict 
 between any Church and the State is more like- 
 ly now to occur than on this. The State of to- 
 day recognizes marriage simply as a contract, 
 subject to secular legislation as completely as 
 any other contract ; Christians, whether Catho- 
 lic or Protestant, on the other hand, regard it 
 as a Divine institution subject to laws with 
 which the State cannot interfere. 
 
 In principle or theory there is no difference 
 between the attitude which a Catholic or that 
 Arhich any other religious or conscientious man 
 <nay have to assume in some cases toward the 
 <aw of the State on this subject. And in no 
 
The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 323 
 
 case does such attitude warrant a charge of 
 opposition or enmity to free institutions, or to 
 the nation to which we belong ; certainly it 
 does so no more than did the conscientious ob- 
 jection which many Northerners had before 
 the war to the returning of fugitive slaves, 
 which was required by national legislation. 
 Such oppositions of conscience to law must 
 occur occasionally, unless we abandon con- 
 science itself and substitute for it a principle 
 of blind obedience to a sovereign or to a ma- 
 jority ; but conscience is really the strongest 
 sanction to law that can exist ; so that nothing, 
 even on the mere ground of expediency, would 
 be gained, but much would be lost by the 
 change. The most conscientious man is radi- 
 cally the best and most loyal citizen ; and he is 
 also effectively so — that is, he supports actually 
 existing laws, on the whole, better than, any 
 other man, since the occasions on which he 
 cannot support them are few and far between. 
 
 Indeed^ even on this matter, in which there 
 is such a great divergence of theoretical view, 
 the actual practical difl&culty arising from the op- 
 position of Church and State laws is compara- 
 tively small. To see this, let us consider the 
 actual laws of the Church regarding marriage; 
 it will also be worth while for its own sake. 
 
 Jn the first place, these laws, properly so- 
 called, do not affect the unbaptizedo The 
 
324 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 Church makes laws for none but those who a«e, 
 by right at least, her members. She does in- 
 deed recognize Divine laws applicable to all 
 men in the matter of marriage, as in other mat- 
 ters ; she regards, for instance, a decree of di- 
 vorce as not only illicit, but as null and void ; 
 and she believes that no man can validly marry 
 his sister, or have more than one wife at the 
 same time. The principal practical application 
 of her belief on these matters is, that a Catholic 
 cannot conscientiously marry a divorced man or 
 woman. But if the Catholic in question be- 
 lieves the teaching of the Church on this point, 
 he does not complain ; and surely no one else 
 has a right to. Neither could there be much 
 complaint if Catholics should be able to bring 
 about a great mbdification or even a complete 
 destruction of the civil laws regarding divorce ; 
 Christians generally would approve, and un- 
 believers would have no more right to object to 
 this than to any other action endorsed by the 
 majority. 
 
 It is not, then, on these matters that trouble 
 would be likely to arise. It is rather on the 
 special laws which the Church does make for 
 those belonging to her fold, which laws, of 
 course, a non-Catholic state will not, as a rule, 
 recognize. 
 
 These laws are principally to the effect of 
 prohibiting or invalidating marriage under cer- 
 
The Catholic Laws of Marriage, 325 
 
 tain conditions ; and they are quite numerous. 
 With regard to relationship, for instance, mar«- 
 riage is not admitted as valid between Catho- 
 lics even so remotely related as third cousins ; 
 nor is the marriage of a Catholic with an un- 
 baptized person recognized. It is not con-j 
 sidered as possible to marry after receiving holy 
 orders ; of this I have already spoken. Nor 
 can one having the solemn vows of a religious 
 order validly marry. Perhaps the most prac- 
 tically important of all these provisions, as far 
 as the State is concerned, is one not existing 
 generally in this country, but prevailing over a 
 great part of Europe, invalidating the marriage 
 of Catholics unless celebrated in the presence 
 of the parish priest and two witnesses. There 
 are other laws than these making marriage in- 
 valid ; others which simply prohibit without 
 invalidating ; but those which I have men- 
 tioned will suffice. The legislation of the 
 Church on this point of impediments to mar- 
 riage, as they are called, is quite complicated ; 
 it is as impossible to explain it in a few words 
 as it would be to put all the civil laws regarding 
 contracts in a nutshell. That Catholics in- 
 tending to marry should make no mistake 
 nullifying their marriage in the sight of the 
 Church, it is as necessary for them to consult a 
 priest as it would be to consult a lawyer before 
 drawing up a complicated legal document ; and 
 
326 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 I may say that it is mainly on this account that 
 the law above mentioned has been made, mak- 
 ing it absolutely necessary for them to get mar- 
 ried in the presence of the priest, in order that 
 he may know their case and be able to advise 
 and warn them properly. And though this 
 provision is not, as has been said, generally in 
 force in this country, this cogent reason for it 
 exists here as elsewhere. 
 
 The Church, then, will often refuse to recog- 
 nize as really married those whom the state 
 regards as being so. As she will not accept as 
 valid the remarriage to other parties of those 
 who have obtained a civil divorce, so also she 
 will not, where her law requiring the presence 
 of the priest is in force, consider a merely civil 
 marriage as being a marriage at all ; nor will 
 she consider those as truly married between 
 whom an invalidating impediment exists ac- 
 cording to her law, though the parties them- 
 selves, as well as the State, are quite ignorant 
 of its existence. Also, vice versa ^ she must 
 necessarily sometimes consider those as really 
 married whom the State will not accept as 
 such ; for instance, in countries where it is nec- 
 essary by civil law that all must be married by 
 the civil magistrate, the Church will regard as 
 married all Catholics who have complied with 
 her own rules, whether they have with those of 
 the State or not. 
 
The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 327 
 
 It must be remembered, however, that it is 
 only concerning the baptized, who alone come 
 nnder the jurisdiction of the Church, that she 
 makes or can make special laws or regulations. 
 
 And it must also be well understood that the 
 laws which are made by the Church admit of 
 dispensation in particular cases. Of this mat- 
 ter of dispensation I have already spoken ; still 
 it will be well to bring it up again, on account 
 of its importance in the present connection. 
 lyCt it not, then, be supposed that the Church 
 meddles with, attempts to change, or makes 
 exception to the laws of God in this or any 
 other matter ; that she undertakes by any act 
 of her own to make right what is wrong ac- 
 cording to the Divine Law. In other words, 
 she does not, as has been clearly stated before, 
 give permission to commit sin, on any terms 
 whatever. But it ?s an entirely different thing 
 to make a rule which it is advisable should be 
 observed on the whole, and to make exceptions 
 to this rule in particular cases. This is no 
 more giving permission to commit sin than it 
 would be for the father of a family to require all 
 to be in the house by ten o'clock at night, and 
 then to allow some one to stay out later for 
 special reasons. 
 
 There are, then, in these rules of the Church 
 regarding marriage, some of greater import- 
 ance^ some of less. It has ^been said that third 
 
328 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 cousins cannot validly marry, for instance ; this, 
 of course, is not held to be part of the divine 
 law; no, it is a rule made by the Church for 
 her own subjects. It might be changed to- 
 morrow, and the limit placed at second cousins, 
 instead of third ; but it is considered best, on the 
 whole, to keep it for the present as it is, in 
 order to discourage the marriage of those who 
 are blood relations. But in any particular case, 
 where any reason can be presented, the im- 
 portance of such a remote relationship is so 
 slight that the law will readily be relaxed. 
 
 On the other hand, the celibacy of the clergy 
 is regarded as such an important matter that 
 the law prohibiting those in holy orders to 
 marry, and invalidating any marriage which 
 they may attempt, is not dispensed for any pri- 
 vate reasons, however grave or urgent they 
 may seem. Indeed, it is obvious that were it 
 otherwise the law would be in grave danger of 
 being broken down. 
 
 Still, it would be a very different matter to 
 give permission for this, from what it would be 
 to allow a man to have two wives at once ; for 
 in this latter case we have a clear and certain 
 Divine Law standing in the way. And the 
 Church will never consent to allow the Divine 
 Law to be broken. She was willing to lose 
 England rather than sanction such an act; 
 Catherine of Aragon being truly and indis- 
 
The Catholic Laws of Marriage, 329 
 
 solubly married to Henry VIII., it waa Aiinply 
 and utterly impossible to give consent to his 
 marriage with another while she was stiH alive ; 
 just as impossible as it would have been to 
 allow him to murder her in order to re iiove the 
 difficulty. If the Pope had been willing to act 
 as Luther acted in his similar case, the Refor* 
 mation would probably have been .effectually 
 checked in England by the royal pow^r; but the 
 Pope, acting in accordance with Catholic princi- 
 ples, could not give permission for sin, or do evil 
 that good might come, even though that good 
 were the saving of a whole nation to the faith. . 
 
 Some cases, then, there may arise of serious 
 and irremediable consequences coming from the 
 inflexibility of the Church regarding the divine 
 law; but though trouble may no doubt arise 
 from the difference of her legislation from that 
 of the State, this trouble would practically be 
 entirely avoided if Catholics would take care 
 always to consult the Church in this important 
 matter. The trouble comes from their break- 
 ing the laws of the Church through ignorance 
 or contempt ; not from their breaking the laws 
 of the State, or still less from any encourage- 
 ment given them by the Church to do so. The 
 State permits marriages which the Church will 
 not recognize ; but it does not require anything 
 which the Church will not permit, nor is it at 
 all likely that it will forbid anything which the 
 
330 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 
 
 Church requires. Where, for instance, a law 
 requiring civil marriage is in force, the Church 
 allows the form to be gone through with, mere- 
 ly instructing her members to regard this form 
 as a mere contract of betrothal, to be ratified by 
 the subsequent marriage in the Church ; the 
 State makes no objection to this subsequent 
 marriage, regarding it simply as a religious 
 ceremony, no more to be prohibited than the 
 reception of Holy Communion on the occasion • 
 would be. J ^ 
 
 If Catholics, then, would be obedient to the 
 Church, the State would have no complications 
 to fear ; and it has no reasonable grounds of 
 complaint against the Church, which is always 
 ready to reinforce any prudent provisions 
 which the civil law may make on this or any 
 other subject. If the State, for instance, doe^ 
 not recognize marriages as valid between 
 minors, the Church will, for obvious reasons of 
 prudence, see, so far as possible, that Catholics 
 do not contract such marriages ; or if a civil 
 license is required, the Church will see that it 
 is obtained. The very watchfulness of the 
 Church in this matter, which requires a careful 
 inquiry into the circumstances of a marriage 
 before allowing it to be contracted, though 
 mainly intended to secure the observance of hei 
 own laws, is of great assistance to the carrying 
 out of those of the State as well. 
 
Use of the Latin Language. 33 1 
 
 As a special instance of this may be men- 
 tioned the law of the Church requiring the 
 publication of the banns, as they are called, 
 before marriage. This proceeding , as of course 
 it is no part of the Divine I^aw, may be^ and 
 often is dispensed, if reason seems to exist for 
 doing so ; but it is insisted on more and more 
 at present, and undoubtedly will be unless 
 some more effectual way of accomplishing the 
 same result shall be substituted for it. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIir. 
 
 USH OF THB I.ATIN I.ANGUAGK. 
 
 MANY object to us that the services of. the 
 Church are conducted, as a rule, in a 
 language not understood by the people. As 
 they have a deeply rooted idea that it is an 
 essential part of our plan to keep the people in 
 ignorance, this seems to them to give their idea 
 strong confirmation. Some— and even well 
 * educated persons — imagine, astonishing as it 
 appears to us, that we preach in I^atin ! We 
 feel flattered, of course, by such a compliment 
 to our classical scholarship, though we feel it to 
 be quite undeserved, for it is safe to say that 
 the number of priests, in this country at least, 
 capable of such an achievement, would be quite 
 
332 Use of the Latin Language. 
 
 inadequate to furnish the multitude of sermons 
 given in our churches. 
 
 But the notion is an admirable instance of 
 the force of the long-established prejudice 
 under which our Protestant brethren labor. 
 One would think they would ask themselves, 
 why we should preach in Latin ; what would be 
 our deep-laid scheme in doing so ? It is hard ' 
 to conceive of any, except to impress the people 
 with our learning ; and surely this could 
 be more easily accomplished in some other 
 way. 
 
 It ought to be hardly necessary, then, to say 
 that we do not preach in Latin, unless on oc- 
 casions, as for instance at great councils of the 
 Church, when that language will on the whole 
 be better understood than any other. It is for 
 this reason, that of better understanding by the 
 mass of those addressed, that our theological 
 books for the use of the clergy are written, as a 
 rule, in Latin; because they are written not 
 for the clergy of one nation, but for all nations ; 
 and all the clergy are supposed to have enough 
 learning to understand a book in Latin, though 
 not perhaps to preach in that language ; where- 
 as it would be unreasonable to expect every 
 one to understand English or German,^to say 
 nothing of the objection other nations might 
 have to see one so preferred. Indeed, the same 
 plan was followed till quite lately in scientifio 
 
Use of the Latin Language. 333 
 
 books, intended to be read by scientific men 
 throughout the world. 
 
 But, to return to the original question, Why 
 is Latin used in the Church services ? Does 
 not this prevent the people from following the 
 service intelligently, and indeed from knowing 
 what is going on ? 
 
 Not at all. For those who are able to read 
 can easily find just the precise meaning of the 
 words the priest is saying, by means of the 
 translations put in the common prayer-books ; 
 and those who cannot read can have these 
 translations read to them. What a pity it is 
 that you cannot get rid of this curious notion 
 that we have secrets which we want to keep 
 back from the people ! You have only to get a 
 prayer-book at the nearest Catholic book-store, 
 or borrow one, and you will find the services of 
 the Church given as far as possible ; though of 
 course there are smaller books, which many pre- 
 fer, in which there are other devotions instead. 
 
 I say that in the prayer-books the services of 
 the Church are given as far as possible ; but it 
 is really not possible, owing to the shiftings 
 which have to be made to adjust the fixed and 
 the movable calendar, to give all the details of 
 those prayers which are changed from day to 
 day. Still, missals for the laity are published, 
 which enable this to be done to a considerable 
 extent, and those who wish cau use them. It 
 
334 ^^^^ Latin Language. 
 
 is found, however, that most people prefer to 
 use other prayers appropriate to the time, and 
 not to be obliged to follow exactly on the lines 
 and rules which the priest has to observe. But 
 there are plenty of occasions on which the ser- 
 vice, being of a somewhat simpler character, 
 can be, and is intended to be, followed word by 
 word; so that those who specially enjoy this 
 form of worship have an ample opportunity to 
 gratify their taste. 
 
 One special reason why it is unadvisable that 
 the prayers of the more important part of the 
 Mass should be said aloud like those used on 
 the occasions of which I have just spoken, and 
 the prayers in Protestant churches generally, 
 and especially why it would not be well to say 
 them ill the vernacular or common language of 
 the people is, that the Mass, as it must be re- 
 membered, is our Communion service. Now, in 
 Protestant churches only a certain select num-^ 
 ber of the whole congregation are present at 
 this service ; and all of them are presumed to 
 be in specially reverent and attentive dispo* 
 sitions, prepared to understand the service, and 
 to join in it piously. But it is quite otherwise 
 with the Catholic Mass. All Catholics are not 
 only requested, but required to be present at it 
 on Sundays and holydays of obligation ; and 
 non-Catholics may also well be there, many of 
 whom may know »othing, or next to nothing, 
 
Use of the Latin Language. 
 
 335 
 
 about our religion or about the Christian reli- 
 gion in any form. It would, therefore, evidently 
 be imprudent to recite aloud in the vernacular 
 tongue the solemn and sacred words used by 
 the priest on this occasion, and especially those 
 relating to the consecration of the bread and 
 wine; and indeed no reason can possibly be 
 given why they should be so recited, as all 
 those who are rightly interested in them can 
 find them in their prayer-books ; for the words 
 of this more important part, the canon of the 
 Mass,** as they are called, are precisely the 
 same every day. 
 
 It seems, then, plain enough, for this reason 
 as well as for the one previously given or im- 
 plied, that of not forcing every one into precise- 
 ly the same form of worship, that the services 
 of the Church cannot well be all given in a 
 loud voice and in the vernacular. It is evi- 
 dently better to recite a considerable part of 
 them quietly ; for these, all that is necessary 
 is that people should not be in ignorance of 
 what is said ; and of this, as has been seen, 
 there is no danger. And, as long as a trans- 
 lation is provided, the language in which they 
 are said is immaterial. 
 
 Still, it may be urged that those parts which 
 are said aloud, or sung at High Mass, ought to 
 be in the common language of the people. 
 And it cannot be denied that these would be 
 
336 hse ofthe Latin Language, 
 
 edifying and interesting to many of those pres- 
 ent if these parts were given in a language 
 which they understood ; particularly those 
 which are not the same every day, but have 
 reference to the special feast which is being 
 celebrated ; but, on the other hand, others might 
 object to being distracted from their own de- 
 votions. 
 
 An advantage is gained, however, by having 
 even these in lyatin, which has not yet been 
 mentioned. It is this : that, in the present 
 arrangement, the service is the same in one 
 country and another, so that Catholic travellers 
 or emigrants find themselves at once at home in 
 any Catholip Church wherever they may go ; 
 and they feel at one with all other Catholics in 
 every place. Whereas, if it were otherwise, a 
 Catholic German would feel like a stranger in 
 his own church in France ; and the wall of 
 separation which difference of language builds 
 up between people of various nations coming to 
 settle in a country like our own would be 
 strengthened, instead of broken down as it 
 should be. As this country wishes to have all 
 foreigners coming here to live to be at home in 
 it, and to become Americans, so the Church 
 wishes all her members in matters of religion 
 to be Catholics, not Frenchmen, Germans, or 
 Italians. Let them be Germans or Frenchmen 
 at homei and Americans when they come here 
 
Use of the Latin Language. 33J 
 
 in all political and national matters; but iii 
 those which concern religion let there be 
 unity, so far as it can be maintained. And the 
 one language of religion helps to secure this, 
 especially as it is a language not belonging to 
 any now existing nation. No other language 
 besides the I^atin could have these advantages, 
 at least in Europe and here ; for the languages 
 of Europe are to a great extent founded on it ; 
 it is a sort of common ground, on which they 
 all meet. 
 
 It must not, however, be imagined that Latin 
 is considered essential by the Catholic Church. 
 Other languages are used in the church service 
 by various peoples which are in union with us. 
 The principal reason why, in point of fact, the 
 Catholic nations of Europe have their Mass and 
 other principal acts of worship in I^atin, is that 
 they were converted to the faith by missionaries 
 sent by the Roman Church at the time of the 
 Roman Empire, when Latin was the language 
 generally used in the western part of that em- 
 pire, where the converted nations mostly lay. 
 But if the Greek or the Russian Church were 
 united with us, as we hope they may be at 
 some time not far distant, they would in all 
 probability desire and be willingly allowed, and 
 perhaps even required, to keep their ancient 
 liturgies unchanged. 
 
 I hope enough has been said to persuade you 
 
338 Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 
 
 that we do not pray in I^atin in order to mystify 
 our people ; for that, after all, is the real point 
 of importance. Depend on it, my dear friends, 
 you are the only ones who are mystified ; and 
 you only are so because you will not come close 
 up to us, and examine to see just what we are 
 like ; you stand off and see us dimly and con- 
 fusedly through the dust and mist that three 
 centuries of prejudice and misunderstanding 
 have raised to blind your eyes. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 CKREMONIES AND RITKS OF THK CHURCH. 
 
 ONE objection to the Catholic Church, which 
 has great practical weight in the minds of 
 many and perhaps of most people who have 
 been brought up in Protestantism, is that she 
 has too many rites and ceremonies. Our wor- 
 ship seems to them to consist principally in 
 dressing up in different kinds of vestments, 
 moving to and fro, bowing and genuflecting, 
 ringing bells and burning incense ; the whole 
 being accompanied with various sorts of musical 
 performances. They fail to see in this any 
 kind of prayer or praise ; it seems to them to be 
 a spectacle intended to amuse or interest the 
 audience, rather than the offering of an hor»^age 
 to the Divine Majesty, 
 
Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 339 
 
 These ideas are perhaps more common in 
 America than in any othfcr part of the Christian 
 world ; and come, no doubt, to a great extent 
 from the Puritan ancestry from which so many 
 of us are descended. And yet it seems strange 
 that a people like these ancestors of ours, whose 
 religion was based so largely on the Old Testa- 
 ment, should have failed to recognize in its 
 pages the Divine approval of ceremonial in wor- 
 ship, not merely intimated in a general way 
 but carried out in the Mosaic law with great 
 detail. The rites of the Catholic Church are 
 surely not more magnificent than those of Solo- 
 mon's temple. 
 
 Well,** it may be said, that is true. But 
 we know that the Old I^aw was abrogated at 
 the coming of Christ. He told us that God is 
 a Spirit ; and that they who worship Him must 
 worship in spirit and in truth.*' Certainly, we 
 all admit that. But did not Solomon himself, 
 when he built the temple, and until his heart 
 was turned to strange gods, worship the one 
 God in spirit and in truth ? Why cannot God 
 be worshipped outwardly as well as inwardly ? 
 What did our lyord Himself say, when He con- 
 demned the Pharisees for tithing mint and rue 
 and every herb, and passing over judgment 
 and the love of God? He said (lyuke xi. 42): 
 **Now these things you ought to have done, 
 aud not to leave those undone," 
 
340 Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 
 
 But it may still be asked: **Do not you 
 Catholics make too much of these outward rites 
 and forms, just as the Jews did of old ; do you 
 not consider them of more importance than the 
 ten commandments, or at least act as if you so 
 considered them ? * * To this I would answer^ 
 that a "Catholic must be indeed poorly ac- 
 quainted with his religion who could entertain 
 such an idea for a moment. Such an one there 
 may be ; such, however, I do not remember 
 ever to have met. And as to the mind of the 
 Church, and the teaching of her doctors and 
 theologians, there can be no doubt whatever. 
 It is allowed on all hands that the rubrics, as 
 we call the rules of the Church concerning rites 
 and ceremonies, are in many cases not binding' 
 under sin at all ; or, in other words, that many 
 of them really do not have the force of law; that 
 they are, as we say, ** directive,'* not **pre* 
 ceptive.'* In others, however, they are un- 
 doubtedly of obligation, especially where they 
 concern the holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But 
 even here they are acknowledged to be of less 
 weight than the obligations of the natural or of 
 the Divine Law. Even the strict fulfilment of 
 the conditions laid down by Christ for the 
 Sacram^^nts themselves may sometimes be jeo- 
 pardized for the sake of man, for whom the 
 Sacraments were established. In case, for ex- 
 ample, of danger in delay, we not only dispense 
 
Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 34! 
 
 with the solemnities which the Church has ap- 
 pointed to accompany baptism, but we even 
 baptize with water which is certainly unfit and 
 perhaps even inadequate to the purpose, repeat- 
 ing the ceremony afterward if there be time. 
 Catholics realize fully the words of Christ 
 (Mark ii. 27) : The Sabbath was made for 
 man, and not man for the Sabbath.'* 
 
 The idea that we are such sticklers for cere- 
 monies is absurd to one who really knows us ; 
 the danger of our neglecting them is greater 
 than of our increasing them. Equally or more 
 so IS the idea that we rely on them mainly for 
 the conversion of the heathen. Missionaries, 
 when they go to pagan countries, cannot usu- 
 ally take with them what is required for the 
 solemn observance of ecclesiastical functions ; 
 and if they could they could seldom use them, 
 on account of the danger of exciting persecution 
 by public displays of that or any sort. The 
 teaching of the faith by them in heathen lands 
 is more like what you might find here in the 
 poorest kind of Sunday-school. 
 
 But it may still be objected: What, after 
 all, is the use of these rites and ceremonies 
 anyway, especially in this enlightened age?*' 
 To this the plain answer is the same as that 
 given before, when we were talking about im- 
 ages and pictures. Ceremonies are, like these, 
 -a means of fixing the attention on things theia- 
 
342 Ceremonies and Rites of the ChurcK \ :^^_ 
 
 ~ ; ; ^1 
 
 selves invisible, which are represented by them J 
 Our thoughts are apt to stray if they have 
 nothing to fix them but bare walls, Man, 
 though a spirit, is not merely a spirit ; he has a 
 body and bodily senses, to which religion must 
 appeal, and bring them to the lines on which he 
 ^wishes his soul to proceed. The world, the 
 flesh, and the devil appeal to the soul by means 
 of the senses ; why should we not turn their 
 own weapons against them, by ceremonial, as 
 well as by music, which Protestants themselves 
 generally use as a lawful means to this end ? 
 
 But it is not only for man*s sake that we 
 should employ these means ; no, it is for God's 
 sake as well. It is right that we should honor 
 Him by offering Him all that is in itself good 
 and beautiful which we have to give. The 
 ceremonial of the Church mainly centres round 
 His Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament ^ 
 which reposes on our altars ; it is to Him there 
 concealed that it is rendered, like the precious 
 ointment poured on His feet by Mary Magdalen. 
 
 He was rebuked for allowing this, you know, 
 but it was the faithless Judas who rebuked 
 Him, and claimed that the ointment -should 
 have been sold and the price given to the poor. 
 Is it not, then, following in his steps, to rebuke 
 us for wasting money on our. Lord ? At any 
 rate, do not do so until you are ready to take 
 from the furnishing and beautifying of your 
 
The Good and the Bad in the Church. 343 
 
 houses what we spend on the house of God, or 
 until you can show that you, to say nothing of 
 your superior means, devote even absolutely as 
 much as we do to the help of the poor whom 
 He loves. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 5rHB GOOD AND THK BAD IN THB CHURCH. 
 
 I COME now, finally, to an objection, the 
 most forcible one, perhaps, that can -be 
 made against us ; for it is one which really has 
 a strong foundation in fact. It is urged against 
 us, that if our organization be really, as it 
 claims to be, the true Church of God, it ought 
 to bear more plainly in the conduct of its mem- 
 bers the marks of its Divine origin. Those who 
 are separated from us say : * * If Catholics, as f 
 rule, led lives of notable piety and holiness ; if 
 they were plainly distinguished from others by 
 their superior virtue ; if they were evidently 
 more just, truthful, pure, sober, and temperate 
 than those around them ; if it. could be se^n 
 from their conduct that their hearts were set on 
 things above, not on those of this world ; then 
 indeed we would be more inclined to acknowl- 
 edge that they were the true followers of Him 
 who gave to us the great example of what man 
 ought to be. ' By their fruits/ He said, *ye 
 
344 Good and the Bad in the Church. 
 
 shall know them ' ; but we do not see the 
 fruits in the lives of most of the Catholics with 
 whom we meet/' 
 
 As I have said, I do not deny the force of 
 this objection. That Catholics are not what 
 they ought to be is indeed a cause of reproach ; 
 it is truly a scandal, a rock of oflfence, a stum- 
 bling-block to unbelievers for which they are 
 to blame. 
 
 But it should in justice be noted that it is 
 one which our Lord Himself, in founding His 
 Church, foresaw and foretold. *'It is impossi- 
 ble,'* He said (I^uke xvii. i), **that scandals 
 should not come : but woe to him through 
 whom they come.*' The same prediction is re- 
 corded by St. Matthew (xviii. 7). And He 
 distinctly announced that His Church should 
 not be composed entirely of the good, but large- 
 ly of the bad. He compared the kingdom of 
 heaven (Matt. xiii. 24-30) to a man who sowed 
 good seed in his field, with which good seed 
 was mixed cockle or tares, sown by his enemy ; 
 at the time of the harvest the wheat from the 
 good seed was gathered into the barn, while 
 the cockle was burned. And again, even more 
 plainly (same chapter, 47-48), He said that the 
 kingdom of heaven was like a net cast into the 
 sea, gathering together all kind of fishes, of 
 which the good were kept, the bad thrown 
 f way. And yet again (Matt. xxv. it is 
 
The Good and the Bad in the Church. 345 
 
 compared to ten virgins, five of whom were 
 wise, five foolish. 
 
 Now, in these passages it is plain that by the 
 kingdom of heaven is meant the Church on 
 earth. For He says that at the end of the 
 world (Matt. xiii. 41) : The Son of man shall 
 send his angels, and they shall gather out of 
 his kingdom all scandals, and them that work 
 iniquity.'* But, as St. Gregory remarks, in 
 His kingdom above no scandals or workers of 
 iniquity are to be found, to be gathered out. 
 
 Protestants < have generally labored to con* 
 struct a church on earth unlike this which our 
 Lord described; that is to say, a church con- 
 sisting entirely of good people. Church-mem- 
 bers, with them, usually have to make a special 
 ^profession of religion ; they are supposed to get 
 religion by a particular favor conferred on them 
 from on high. In some denominations, it is 
 supposed also that if one once really gets reli- 
 gion he cannot lose it ; he is justified and 
 sanctified from that time on, and his life is ex- 
 pected to correspond with the particular favor 
 which he has received. If he backslides al- 
 together, this can be accounted for by his never 
 really having got religion at all; though in 
 Luther's mind, as has before been observed, a 
 careless and sinful life would have been no 
 argument against such an one, if he still kept 
 a lively faith that he had been saved by 
 
346 The Good and the Bad in the Church* 
 
 Christ. But this would hardly do now, and 
 indeed it could hardly have ever worked in 
 practice ; practieally, with most of our Protest- 
 ants, a man or woman who is a church-member 
 must lead a good life, such as is worthy, at 
 least in appearance, of the profession which is 
 made. 
 
 But with us all this is different. Every one 
 who is baptized is with us a member of the 
 Church, just as much as the Pope himself. 
 There is no distinction with us between com- 
 municants and non-communicants, except what 
 comes from the consideration that very young 
 children cannot be expected to communicate 
 intelligently, so that it is advisable that they 
 should not receive until the age, say, of ten or 
 eleven. But there is no hard-and-fast line 
 drawn even here ; some children who are spe- 
 cially intelligent or pious make their first Com- 
 munion at an earlier age. And the practice 
 has prevailed at some times and places of giv- 
 ing Communion even to infants. I need hardly 
 say that this does not exist here with us. 
 
 It is true that Catholics are sometimes ex- 
 communicated,*' as we say, until such time as 
 they repent for specially grievous or scandalous 
 sins, committed in defiance of the excommuni- 
 cation which may be attached to such sins. 
 But this is rare ; one is not excommunicated 
 simply by leading a careless or even a sinful life. 
 
The Good and the Bad in the Church. 347 
 
 The result of our discipline is, of course, that 
 we have, in accordance with our I^ord's pre- 
 diction, a large number of negligent or even 
 notably vicious people, whose lives are a scan- 
 dal to the Church, and reprobated by it in the 
 plainest way, but who still hold on to their 
 faith and must be considered as Catholics. 
 We may sometimes wonder that they do not 
 abandon the Church whose instructions they 
 confessedly do not follow ; but if they do not 
 the Church does not expel them, except in the 
 extreme or special cases above mentioned, but 
 still counts them as her children, and patiently 
 hopes and waits for their repentance and return, 
 at least at the hour of death. The tares are 
 allowed to grow up with the wheat, to be sepa- 
 rated finally only b^ God and His angels at the 
 judgment, not before, according to our I^ord's 
 words already quoted. We should make great 
 mistakes if we should try to separate them 
 here; we should, as He has warned us, root 
 up the wheat with the tares; for often those 
 who have sinned turn to God, and persevere to 
 the end ; while those who for a long time have 
 served Him sometimes fall away. 
 
 No comparison can, then, justly be made be- 
 tween Catholic and Protestant church-members 
 or even church-goers ; for all Catholics, practi- 
 cally, are church-members until they formally 
 renounce their faith, while only a select num- 
 
348 The Good and the Bad in the Church. 
 
 ber of Protestants are so ; and Catholics, as a 
 rule, however bad their lives, go to Mass oc- 
 casionally at least, and very probably regularly, 
 while Protestants are very apt to stay at home. 
 
 But it m^y be still urged that the conduct of 
 Protestants at large, irrespective of church- 
 membership, is better than that of Catholics. 
 I would say to this, that were it true it would 
 perhaps prove too much for those to whom 
 these pages are principally addressed ; that is, 
 for sincere and practical non-Catholic Chris- 
 tians, who believe in the Christian religion and 
 live according to their idea of it. For a very 
 large proportion, if not indeed an actual ma- 
 jority of Protestants, at least in this country, 
 are simply that and nothing more ; that is to 
 say, they protest, as their fathers did, against 
 the Catholic Church, but their religion stops at 
 that. There is nothing positive about it ; in 
 other words, they simply have no faith, Chris- 
 tian or otherwise. Take care, then, that you do 
 not undermine the ground on which you your- 
 selves stand, by adducing arguments which 
 may only go to prove that Christianity is worse 
 than no religion at all. 
 
 In point of fact, however, the arguments 
 which you draw from your own observation of 
 things immediately around you, or in this 
 country, generally have little bearing on the 
 question. The ordinary criminality which at* 
 
The Good and the Bad in the Church. 349 
 
 tracts your attention is rather due to lack of 
 education and of worldly means than to any 
 other cause. Education, the cultivation of the 
 intellect, has a double effect in this regard. It 
 withdraws a man somewhat from the lower and 
 more animal temptations, by giving him some- 
 thing else to think about ; at the same time it 
 enables him to conceal his sins more skilfully, 
 and to plan them more artfully. And wealth 
 secures him from the ordinary smaller and open 
 sins against property, at the same time enabling 
 him better to protect himself from the conse- 
 quences of dishonesty. It may well be ques- 
 tioned whether edjucation and wealth make men 
 really better ; but they certainly make them 
 apparently so, as a rule. The comparison, then, 
 between one religious or irreligious belief and 
 another, made from ordinary superficial statis- 
 tics, is not fair till these causes of difference are 
 removed or due allowance made for them. 
 Men, like things, otherwise similar must be 
 taken for comparison, if we are going to ascer- 
 tain the effect of some particular disparity, as 
 that of religion, now in qtj^stion. 
 
 And it must be remembered that it is not our 
 fault that the Catholics of this country have, as 
 a rule, hitherto occupied a lower position with 
 regard to these worldly gifts than their fellow- 
 citizens. Those of them from whom you most- 
 ly draw your conclusions have been deprived 
 
SSO The Good and the Bad in the Church. 
 
 of these advantages, and deprived of them, not 
 by their religion but on account of their reli- 
 gion. England has for centuries taken from 
 them the necessary means of acquiring wealth 
 and knowledge, except on the condition that 
 they would renounce their faith ; this is simply 
 history, and an unspeakably disgraceful page 
 of it. Englishmen, and the descendants of 
 Englishmen, ought to be ashamed to speak of 
 persecution, after this crushing of the minds 
 and bodies of a whole nation for hundreds of 
 years. And yet some of them would continue 
 the same work here. ^ 
 
 To resume. We are anxious that Catholics 
 should acquire the same advantages as others, 
 provided that they do not set their hearts more 
 on the wisdom and goods of this world than on 
 those which are from above ; and we are mak- 
 ing up the difference, as you cannot fail to see, 
 as fast as you will let us. 
 
 The fairest comparison which can now be 
 made between the effects of the Catholic religion 
 and the various Protestant forms of Christian- 
 ity, would be that between those who carry out 
 in their lives their respective precepts. We are 
 not at all afraid to put the conduct of practical 
 Catholics, who approach the sacraments regu- 
 lariy, against that of any other church-members. 
 
 The general question, however, of the rela- 
 tive morality of Catholic and Protestant couu* 
 
The Good and the Bad in the Church. 351 
 
 tries over the world, in which the differences 
 of w lich I have spoken are of course to some 
 extent removed, is, no doubt, of great interest, 
 and the results, when thoroughly treated, may 
 somewhat surprise you. Books have been 
 written on this subject, which is too extensive 
 to be treated here ; one quite lately, and now 
 easily obtainable, by Rev. A. Young, C.S.P., 
 under the title Catholic and Protestant Countries 
 compared. 
 
 But do not forget for a moment that we by 
 no means claim that because a man is a Catho- 
 lic, he is necessarily better than one who is 
 not. So far is this from being the case, that 
 bad Catholics who live regardless of the laws 
 and the morality of the Church may easily be, 
 and often are, worse than if they did not belong 
 to it. There is a lyatin proverb, Corruptio 
 optimi pessima^^ \ which means, **The cor- 
 ruption of what was best is the worst of all 
 corruption.'' And indeed it is plain, if the 
 Catholic religion is what we claim, that he who 
 sins against it is worse than others, as sinning 
 against the greater Hght. But this is no rea- 
 son for our not coming to the light, and follow- 
 ing its guidance^ The kingdom of heaven,'* 
 says our Divine Saviour (v. 45-46 of the chap- 
 ter of St. Matthew already quoted), is like a 
 merchant seeking good pearls ; who, when he 
 bad found one pearl of great price, went his 
 
352 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 way, and sold all that he had, and bought it.'* 
 Let us, like him, all the more show our appre- 
 ciation of that pearl of great price, which others 
 have despised. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 CONCI.USION. 
 
 I CANNOT well close this book without say- 
 ing a few words about the attitude of the 
 Church regarding two vices, which it is sup- 
 posed by some Protestants not merely not to 
 condemn, but even to encourage. And yet it 
 ought hardly to be necessary to do so, as the 
 Catholic teaching concerning them is simply 
 that of reason and common sense. 
 
 The vices of which I speak are those of 
 drunkenness and gambling. Let us take them 
 separately, though rq^Hy the treatment '>f both 
 of these subjects is much the same. 
 
 The Catholic Church, then, does not condemn 
 the drinking of wine or other alcoholic liquors 
 as bad or sinful in itself. It sanctions the use 
 of fermented wine for Mass, in which the priest 
 receives Communion under this form, as has 
 been said. And the common opinion among 
 us, and indeed among Christians generally, is 
 that our Lord partook of such wine also on 
 other occasions, and that its use' is approved in 
 
Conclusion. 
 
 353 
 
 other passages of Holy Scripture. And there 
 seems to be no reason why other similar drinks 
 may not be used as well as wine, reasonable 
 limits being observed. 
 
 But the Church has always condemned the 
 excessive or intemperate use of such drinks, 
 and always regarded drunkenness as a mortal 
 sin ; and a very grievous and dangerous one 
 too, it being the cause and source of most of the 
 others into which men commonly fall. More- 
 over, as there are many persons who cannot 
 touch any kind of spirituous drink without go- 
 ing to excess, total abstinence from it is for 
 these many an absolute necessity ; for such, 
 even to taste it would be a mortal sin. And 
 the Church has, especially in these times, when 
 the evil has become so rampant, set her face 
 very strongly against the indiscriminate sale of 
 strong drink, and'the saloon business- generally . 
 She also encourages total abstinence as the best 
 of all mortifications, even for those who do not 
 need it as a safeguard. 
 
 With regard to gambling, the state of the 
 question is, as has been said, very similar. To 
 risk money on events determined by what we 
 call chance, is not itself clearly condemned 
 either by reason' or the law of God. There is 
 no reason in the nature of things why a con- 
 tract should not be made, with conditions de- 
 termined by chance, as well as one with fixed 
 
U54 Conclusion. 
 
 conditions, if the chances are fair all round, and 
 the stake not so large that some one or more of 
 the parties cannot properly afford to take the 
 risk. Would you object, for instance, to toss- 
 ing up to see whether you or your friend 
 should undertake some work, which one of you 
 had to do? If not, then you see no harm in 
 the principle of the thing, which is the same 
 throughout. But if this thing, which seems 
 innocent in itself, is prohibited by some positive 
 Divine Law, such law should be proved to 
 exist. 
 
 It is with gambling as with drink. It is the 
 excess, and the passion for it, which makes the 
 danger. And no doubt it is a terrible one. 
 Gambling 'is a strong temptation, a road to 
 ruin, for very many, unquestionably ; and the 
 Church easily agrees with the State, when the ' 
 latter legislates against public lotteries and 
 gaming-houses on this account, as well as on 
 account of the unfairness and cheating often 
 connected with them. 
 
 I have now, my dear friends and fello.r-coun- 
 trymen, gone over, as far as space will permit, 
 what seem to be the principal objections likely 
 tc exist in your minds against the Catholic 
 Church. 1 have not, as you will notice, en* 
 deavored to prove its doctrines by positive 
 
Conclusion. 
 
 35S 
 
 arguments ; but simply to show that what you 
 value and cherish as your Christian inheritance, 
 it also holds ; and that what it teaches over 
 and above this is not what your imagination, 
 warped by the prejudices and the false tra- 
 ditions handed down from generation to genera- 
 tion, would have it to be. If you wish to know 
 our teaching and our practice more in detail, 
 there is nothing to prevent your knowing them. 
 Our book-stores are full of works on these sub- 
 jects, from the simplest catechism to the most 
 profound theology ; and in them you may, per- 
 haps, place more confidence than in what I have 
 presented to you here ; for our books, in general, 
 are written for Catholics ; and in them you will 
 hardly expect special pleading, such as you 
 may perhaps look for in a work like this. 
 
 Read, then, some at least of these books, writ- 
 ten by Catholics for Catholics ; if not in search 
 of conviction, at least for information; that 
 when you speak or write about what we hold 
 and teach, you may at least do so intelligently. 
 One need not know everything, but it is well to 
 know what one is talking about. There may 
 be, there no doubt are, many subjects in the 
 range of human knowledge about which you 
 need not inform yourselves ; there is not indeed 
 time even for the greatest minds to learn all 
 that is to be learned in this world. But the 
 subject of religion, especially when it is the re- 
 
356 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 ligion held by the vast majority of Christians 
 through the world, over three hundred million 
 at least — for the Greek, Russian, and Eastern 
 Churches hold substantially the same faith as 
 we — is too important a one to be lightly passed 
 over, especially when all the information you 
 have hitherto had about it has come from per- 
 sons having the same , prejudices that you have 
 yourselves. 
 
 If you hold any special form of Protestant 
 religion, or even if you are merely definitely 
 and decidedly a Protestant, objecting to and 
 protesting against the Catholic Church, the 
 obligation of inquiry is stronger than it would 
 be if you were simply indifferent ; though that 
 you cannot reasonably be. For you ought to 
 know, from original information, not as you 
 think you do now, from second-hand authority, 
 what it is that you are protesting against. If 
 you protest against the bad morals which have 
 existed and must necessarily exist in the 
 Church of God, not only among the laity but 
 even to some extent among the -olergy them- 
 selves, know that we join with you most heart- 
 ily in these protests, and that all good men in 
 the Churcli, its authorities, both rulers and 
 teachers especially, are always laboring to re- 
 form its moral life and to correct practical 
 abuses. We do not deny that reformation of 
 
Conclusion, 
 
 357 
 
 this kind in it is always needed; and it was 
 no doubt particularly needed when Luther set 
 about his self-imposed task. Side by side with 
 him and his followers the Council of Trent, 
 assembled in the name of the Church, was at 
 work carrying out a true reformation, amending 
 discipline and teaching true faith and morals 
 against the prevailing errors of the day. 
 
 But if you think that your protest goes far- 
 ther than this, be sure, as I have said, just pre- 
 cisely what it is and against what it is made; 
 Do not make a protest against some dogma - or 
 some rule of morals which the Church never 
 dreamed of maintaining, and against which it 
 w^ould protest as strongly as you. 
 
 And even if you find anything, though I 
 hardly think you will, in the real teaching of 
 the Church which seems too difiicult to believe, 
 remember, if, as I suppose, you wish to be a 
 Christian, that after all the presumption is in 
 her favor, as the interpreter of what Christ and 
 His apostles really taught ; that is, as to what 
 Christianity really is. Do not at once be sure 
 that you know more about this than the Church 
 which has existed from the beginning, because 
 you are in possession of some writings of the 
 evangelists and apostles which the Church her- 
 self preserved for you. She has and accepts all 
 that you have, and more, It i3 simply a ques- 
 
358 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 tion as to which knows most on the subject; 
 she, with the wisdom of the ages, or you with 
 yours of yesterday ; she with the commission 
 of Christ to teach the world, you with one com- 
 ing only from yourself. Is it not, to say the 
 least, more likely that the Holy Spirit which 
 rested on the Apostles in the beginning should 
 be with their duly appointed successors than 
 with yourself ? Surely one ought to be careful, 
 and think and pray long and hard, and be sure 
 that he has a special call from God, before un- 
 dertaking to reform an institution which Christ 
 placed in the world, and with which He 
 promised He would alwaj'^s be. 
 
 But as for us, we will not find fault with yot' 
 in your difficulties ; especially such of us as 
 have been where yoM now stand. All we ask 
 is that you would be candid and sincere, 
 earnestly desiring to know the truth ; that you 
 will not, for the sake of pride or any worldly 
 -consideration, refuse to attend to the plain facts 
 which I have presented specially to you, 
 Americans like myself, and that you will act 
 according to your coiiscience on the knowledge 
 which you may here or elsewhere obtain. 
 And it should be remembered that this is not 
 a merely speculative subject. To consider it 
 properly, something more is required besides 
 candor and sincerity ; and that is a realization 
 
Conclusion, 
 
 359 
 
 of the supreme importance of the matter in 
 hand. 
 
 The question is simply this : Has Almighty- 
 God established in this world a means not only 
 for the preservation of His truth, bub also for 
 the pardon and reparation of sin, such as the 
 Catholic Church claims to be ? Does he com- 
 mand us, not only to listen to its voice, to be 
 enlightened and instructed by it, but to come 
 to it, to belong to it, and to receive its Sacra- 
 ments, in order to cleanse our souls from sin, 
 and to conquer in our struggle with tem^>ta- 
 tion ? 
 
 If you, reader, feel no danger from sin, no 
 need of forgiveness for it, no difficulty in over- 
 coming it, this question may not come home to 
 you. But if, like the rest of us, you do feel 
 the weight of sin upon you, the most important 
 and practical of all questions for you is, What 
 means has God provided that I may rid myself 
 of it, and keep myself from it? What shall I 
 do to be saved ? ' ' 
 
 And it is a question which must be asked, 
 not merely of our own reason or common sense 
 but of Him who alone can assure us of the true 
 answer to it. One must turn to God, one must 
 pray, to know with certainty the answer to this 
 most momentous of questions. Do not say, 
 •* My father's, or my mother^s religion is good" 
 
36o 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 enpugh for me ; for nothing short of the truth 
 is good enough for anybodyi^in this matter. 
 The first thing is to free yourself from preju- 
 dice, not to take for granted that you know all 
 about it, to listen to reason ; but this done, do 
 something more. Ask God to give you the 
 light to know His will, and the strength to 
 obey it, whatever may be the sacrifice required. 
 Say, as St. Paul did when he began to see 
 that it was God whom he had been opposing, 
 ** lyord, what wilt Thou have me to do?" 
 
CATALOGUE OF THE PUBLICATIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 COLUMBUS PRESS, 
 
 120 West 6oth Street, New York. 
 
 The Columbus Press is a Missionary In- 
 stitution, organized and controlled by the 
 Paulist Fathers, for the dissemination of 
 Catholic literature. Its object is to distribute 
 as widespread as possible Books, Pamphlets 
 and Leaflets at a cost which provides simply 
 for current expenses. We have no interest 
 on investment, no expensive rental, or no 
 salaries for high-priced officials to pay. Our 
 purpose is to further the Apostolate of the 
 Press by the sale of printed truth and to put 
 the price of Catholic books within reach of 
 all. 
 
 The prices quoted in this Catalogue are 
 the figures at which the book sells at retail 
 • ^sTo the Trade and any one buying in 
 quantities large discounts are offered. 
 
PLAIN FACTS FOR FAIR MINDS. 
 
 An Appeal to Candor and Common Sense. 
 By Rev. George M. Searle, Paulist, 
 
 Projesi^ of Mathematics and Astronomy at Catholic University 
 of America^ Washington^ D. C. 
 
 365 pages, cloth, 50 cents ; paper, 10 cents. 
 
 Father Searle is a convert who knows the American mind 
 urell, and in this hand-book presents the truth in so taking a way 
 !hat non-Catholics are charmed with its simple directness. It has 
 Uso a double advantage of being prepared as an answer to the 
 numerous queries coming through the " Question Box " on Father 
 Elliott's Missions for Non-Catholics. There is no better book to 
 g^ive away in quantities or to use for the instruction of converts. 
 
 A BRIEF HISTORY OF RELIGION 
 
 from the Creation of the W arid to the present time , 
 to which is added an Historical Sketch of the 
 Catholic Church in the United States. 
 
 46 pages, paper, 10 cents. 
 
 The study of history is the beaten track leading from reli- 
 g^ious error to Catholic truth. The first part of this little work 
 shows the unity and consistency of God's dealings with men. The 
 second part, from the pen of Father Hecker, is an invincible argu- 
 ment for Catholic truth drawn from its relation to our popular 
 institutions. It is valuable as a text-book in Sunday-schools. 
 
 THE INQUIRER'S CATECHISM. 
 
 Lead, Kindly Li^ht, Adapted from the Catechism 
 of Rev, F. X, Reichart ; published with the 
 €,pproval of the Bishop of Salford, England, 
 
 48 pages, paper, 5 cents. 
 
 A short, handy, concise, and cheap manual to give to those 
 who are inquiring about the Church. A supply at hand in the 
 church office or confessional will satisfy the demand, and mav lead 
 many who cora*^ timidly to ask, into the right way. 
 
The Life of Christ. 
 
 By REV. WALTER ELLIOTT, C.S.P. 
 Over 1,000 Illustrations. 800 pages. 
 Bound in clotH. Price, One Dollar. 
 
 A notable volume. — Catholic Record. 
 
 A Life of Christ elevating and sanctifying. — Camillus in 
 Catholic News. 
 
 This is the peculiar characteristic and excellence of this new 
 book ; it is to put Christ in such a light that the people of to-day- 
 will be able to understand Him better. — New World — Chicago. 
 
 The sweet devotional spirit that pervades this Life of Christ 
 commends it to the heart of the masses. — Baltimore Sun. 
 
 The spirit of our Lord breathes in every page of it. — Provi- 
 dence Visitor. 
 
 Every page breathes messages of love and mercy. — Domini- 
 cana. 
 
 A carefully written work which glows throughout with reli- 
 gious fervor. — Outlook. 
 
 Father EUiott's book is to be welcomed. — The Churchman, 
 
 THE COLUMBUS PRESS, 
 1 20 West 60th Street, NEW YORK. 
 
CHURCH AND THE AGE. 
 
 An Exposition of the Catnolic Church in view of 
 the Needs and Aspirations of the present Age. 
 By Very Rev. I. T. Hecker. 
 
 An epoch-making: book. One cannot well understand the 
 signs of the times and the outcome of the new dispensation with- 
 out getting Father Hecker's views. It is a book to be read and 
 re-read, talked over, and then read again. The relations of in- 
 telligence and liberty to the religious iife of the Church are here 
 fully discussed. 
 
 THE OXFORD MOVEMENT IN 
 AMERICA ; 
 
 Glimpses of Life in an Anglican Seminary. 
 By Rev. Clarence A. Walworth, 
 
 Author Gentle Skeptic,'' Andiatorocte;' etc. 
 
 175 pages, cloth, $I. 
 
 A most Intensely interesting personal narrative of the rise •! 
 latter-day Episcopalianism. Father Walworth was a student at 
 the General Theological Seminary when the Oxford Movemenf 
 was in full swing. Many names well known to-day were in the 
 list also. The part these actors took in the play is related by one 
 who was on tne ftage, and knew them all thoroughly. In a 
 simple yet kindly way he tells many tales out of school- 
 
 FIVE MINUTE SERMONS. 
 
 Volume /. New Series, 
 By the Paulists. 
 516 pages, cloth, $l each. 
 
 This volume contains the Gospel and Epistle for each Sun- 
 day of the year and three well-selected, practical, and pointed 
 Sermonettes for the Low Masses. The advantage of this collec- 
 tion is that the sermons are by practical preachers, have been 
 actually preached, and after careful revision are now offered to the 
 Clergy. This is an entirely new volume, the sermons have 
 Bcver been published before in book-form. It makes an excellent 
 Manual for use on the altar. 
 
 Volumes I. and II.. old series, can be suDoIied at $1 each. 
 
ASPIRATIONS OF NATURE. 
 
 By Very Rev. I. T. Hecker. 
 
 360 pages, paper, 20 cents. 
 
 Father Hecker in his original way argues himself in tkb 
 work, from a basis which supposes the religious instinct, into the 
 Catholic Church, where this instinct receives its fullest develop- 
 ment. It is a most valuable book to an intelligent man who has 
 drifted away from all organized religion. 
 
 ANDIATOROCTE ; 
 
 or, The Eve of Lady Day on Lake George ; and other 
 Poems, Hy7nnSy and Meditations in Verse. 
 
 By Rev. Father Walworth, of Albany, N. Y. 
 
 240 pages, cloth, gilt ^dges, $1. 
 
 Father Walworth has written poetry of very high merit. 
 This collection of his life poems includes his best creations. 
 Many are racy of the soil, some bespeak the poetry of Indian 
 legend, still others are born of a deep religious nature. 
 
 FATHER YOUNG'S 
 CHURCH MUSIC PUBLICATIONS. 
 
 The Catbolio Hymnal, 8vo, boards, 50 cents per copy. In 
 lots of 50 and more, 30 cents per copy. Contains 238 
 hymns, words and music, appropriate to the festivals and sea- 
 sons of the liturgical year, and for special devotions. 
 
 An Order of Vivine Praise and Prayer, 57 pages 24100, 
 paper. A number of prayers and hymns, with music, suitable 
 for a congregational service, perjiundred. Specimen cop- 
 ies furnished ONLY on receipt of jo cents. 
 
 Carols for a Merry Christmas. 38 carols, words and music 
 
 I Stiff cover, broad 24mo, 25 cents each. 
 
 Carols for a Joyous faster, 28 characteristic E^er Garola^ 
 words and music. Stiff cover, b^oad 24mo. 25 cents. 
 
 Carols for the Month of May, 6 carols, words and music, 
 in praise of Our Lady. Stiff cover, broad 24mo. jo cents each. 
 
 Congregational Singing, How to establish it : What to do, 
 and what not to do. A brief practical treatise. Paper, 3 pages, 
 8vo. On receipt of jo cents a copy of this treatise and a 
 specimen copy of the Divine Praise and Prayer will be 
 sent. 
 
Father Edmund Hill's 
 
 The Voice of the 
 
 Good Shepherd^ 
 
 It is the story of the 
 way a young University 
 man was led into the Cath- 
 olic Church. 
 
 We want to dissemi- 
 nate thousands of this book- 
 let among the college stu- 
 dents of the country. 
 
 It sells in quantities 
 
 AT $2.50 A HUNDRED. 
 
 SKND CASH WITH TH^ ORD^R. 
 
THE TEACHING OF ST. JOHN THE 
 
 ' APOSTLE to the Churches of Asia and the World 
 '^5 PP-> 36 full-page illustrations, cloth, $t. 
 By Anflnstine Francis Hewit, D.D.| 
 
 the Congregation of St. Paul, 
 This iS a new translation of the writings of St. John the 
 Hpostle by one of the ablest scholars of the day in America, and 
 it offers a specimen of an improved English version of the sacred 
 canonical Scriptures. The Catholic Hierarchy of this day clasps 
 the hand of St. John, on whose head rested the hand of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ. From this fact, for the present needs of religious 
 truth, the writings of St. John acquire much of their importaace. 
 Hence this new translation of them. 
 
 LIFE OF FATHER HECKER. 
 
 By Dr. William Barry. 
 
 75 pages, paper, 10 cents. 
 
 It is a good summary of the larger life of Father Hecker by 
 Father Elliott. It originally appeared as a critique in the Dublin 
 Review. It is a European's estimate of an American and his in- 
 fluence on the American Church. 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE SOUL. 
 
 By Very Rev. I. T. Hecker, Paulist. 
 
 294 pages, paper, 20 cents. 
 
 Much that this book contains is a narrative of Father Hecker*£ 
 attempt to solve the problems of life outside the Church and his 
 failure to do so, together with an enthusiastic and most attractive 
 description of how the Catholic Church revealed God to his thirst- 
 ing soul. A well-meaning man will find herein the road to union 
 with God. For those who have no positive religion this book is 
 very valuable. 
 
 MARY, THE MOTHER OF JESU5, 
 
 By John Henry Cardinal Newman. 
 
 136 pages, paper, 20 cents. 
 
 This is by all odds the best statement of Catholic doctrine on 
 the devotion to the Blessed Virgin in the English language. It 
 was Newman^s celebrated answer to Pusey. It is thorough, com* 
 plete, masterly. ^ 
 
PROBLEMS OF THE AGE; 
 
 with Studies in St, Augustine on Kindred Topics. 
 .Py Very Rev. Augustine F. Hewit, D.D. 
 440 pages, cloth, 75 cents. 
 
 This IS the best statement in English of some of the funda* 
 " mental questions that lie on the borderland between natural and 
 revealed religions, of original sin and the problem of evil, etc. For 
 one who thinks for himself we know of nothing better in English. 
 
 Problems of th:^ Age in paper, 287 pages, 
 25 cents. 
 
 Studies in St, Augustine in paper, 155 pa- 
 ges, 25 cents. 
 
 THE KING'S fflGHWAY ; 
 
 or. The Catholic Church the Way of Salvation as 
 revealed in the Holy Scriptures. 
 By Very Rev. A. F. Hewit, D.D. 
 292 pages, cloth, 50 cents; paper, 25 cents. 
 
 It is the Catholic Church proved to be divine from the 
 Scriptural argument. First-rate in dealing with old-fashioned 
 Protestants. 
 
 MISSION HYMNS WITH MUSIC. 
 
 32 pages, paper, 5 cents ; $3 per hundred- 
 
 These hymns are arranged for use of the people in conere^n 
 tional singing. They have been found to be ♦•singable," #t\ 
 easily learned, and are good to use during the time of a mission. 
 
 MISSION HYMNS WITHOUT MUSIft 
 
 The same as above. $l per hundred. 
 
Sermons for the Eccle- 
 siastical Year. 
 
 By Very Rev. GEORGE DESHON, C.S.P. 
 
 Cloth) 500 pagfes, $i« 
 
 Father Deshon's sermons have a winning quality that reminds 
 one of Father Faber. — New York Freeman s Journal, 
 
 These brief discourses emphasize the practical interests of 
 religion. — OutUok, 
 
 Their very simphcity has a charm all its own. — Catholic C9lufn' 
 bian. 
 
 Readers of this course of sermons will find therein much practi- 
 cal help and spiritual inspiration. — Sacred Heart Review, 
 
 Most stimulating to parish priests and excellent spiritual read- 
 ing for any one. — Boston Pilot. 
 
 Suggestive to priests and helpful to laymen. — Catholic^ Universe, 
 
 The attentive reader cannot fail to feel that in these pages a 
 living man, full of earnestness, zeal for souls, and a piety which 
 frequently breathes the charm of mysticism, is personally speak- 
 ing to him. Priests too, who complain, not without reason, that 
 most books of sermons are flat, stale, and unprofitable, will find 
 in these that personal character which is often so sadly wanting. 
 —Camillus in Catholic News, 
 
 THE COLUMBUS PRESS, 
 120 West 60th Street, NEW YORK. 
 
JESUS CRUCIFIED 
 
 READINGS ON THE PASSION 
 OF OUR LORD. 
 
 f 
 
 By FATHER ELLIOTT, Paulist. 
 
 The well-known writer of " The Life 
 of Christ," which is now in its fifteenth 
 edition, has contributed this additioral 
 volume of devotion*" reading on the Pas- 
 sion of our Lord. 
 
 Price, $1.00. Postage, lo cents. 
 
 THE COLUMBUS PRESS, 
 
 I20 West 6oth Street, NEW YORK. 
 
CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT COUN- 
 TRIES COMPARED 
 
 in Civilization, Popular Happiness, General InielU^ 
 gence, and Morality. 
 
 By Alfred Young, Paulist. 
 636 pages, cloth, $I, 
 
 A common argument against the Divinity of the Church ist| 
 see its demoralizing influence on the civilization of Catholic 
 countries. Father Young covers the whole field of social ques- 
 tions and completely answers all such charges. The New York 
 Sun says : *' Considering the scope of Father Young's book and 
 the extraordinary amount of research required by it, we do not 
 hesitate to pronounce it the strongest piece of controversial lit- 
 erature upon the Catholic side that has been put forth ia recent 
 times." 
 
 CATHOLIC BELIEF. 
 
 A Short and Simple Exposition of Catholic Doctrine. 
 By Rev. J. Faa Di Bruno. 
 433 pages, paper, 20 cents. 
 
 The best-known compendium of the teachings of the Church, 
 A book for the million. Bishops need it for missionary work 
 among non-Catholics. Priests need it in instructing Converts, 
 People need it as a handy manual of Christian Doctrine. Dis- 
 count for large quantities. 
 
 PATRIOTISM : ITS DUTY AND VALUE. 
 
 By Most Rev. John Ireland, D.D. 
 16 pages, paper, 5 cents ; $3 per hundred. 
 
 This is a splendid statement in Archbishop Ireland's masterljr 
 style of the attitude of the American citizen to his country. It 
 was originally delivered as an address before the Loyal Legion, 
 It is very good for distribution in quantities to cuilivate cKiit 
 virtue. 
 
 WHY I AM A CATHOLIC. 
 
 By Rev. Walter Elliott. 
 
 8 pages, %x per hundred. 
 
Sixty-five Leaflets. 
 
 4 pp. tracts', 25 cts. per 100; $2.60 per 1,000. 8 pp., 60 ctt. per 
 100; $5 per 1,000. 12 pp., 60 cts. per 100 ; $6 per 1,000. 
 
 RELIGIOUS INDIFFERENTISM AND ITS REMEDY. 
 To refute the objection, One religion is as good as another. 4 pp. 
 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE PLEA OF SINCERITY. Truth in itself the object of 
 intellectual investigation. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE NIGHT BEFORE THE FORLORN HOPE; or, 
 Prayer a Resource in all Danger. 4 pp. 25 cts. per loo ; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT SHALL I DO TO BE SAVED ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 THE PLEA OF UNCERTAINTY. Truth for all men is 
 one ; therefore there can be no uncertainty. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT MY UNCLE SAID ABOUT THE POPE. Who 
 is to interpret the Bible, the fallible individual or the infallible 
 Church ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW SHALL WE FIND TRUE CHRISTIANITY? 
 The Church teaching with divine authority is the rule of faith. 
 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 CATHOLIC TRADITION. 4pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 
 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT IS TO BE DONE IN SUCH A CASE ? Intem- 
 perance in tjie family. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE SENATORS OF SHERBURN ; or, A Lawyer's 
 Rule of Faith. The Church or the Bible ? 8 pp. $5 per 
 1,000. 
 
 THE REAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EU. 
 CHARIST. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 A CONVERSATION ON UNION AMONG CHRISTIANS. 
 The principle of unity is submission to lawful constituted author- 
 ity. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 THE GOSPEL DOOR OF MERCY. How sins are for- 
 given. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 A VOICE IN THE NIGHT; or, Lessons in the Sick- 
 Room. Sickness a messenger of God to convert the sinner, 
 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 THE GOSPEL CHURCH, (i) An authoritatively teaching 
 Church. (2) A sacramental Church. (3) A sacrificing Church, 
 12 pp. $6per 1,000. 
 
 WHO IS JESUS CHRIST ? The divinity of our Lord 
 proved from Scripture, history, and civilization. 12 pp. $6 per 
 1,000. 
 
 THE TRINITY. Its reasonableness. The proof of its re- 
 velation. 12 pp. $6 per 1,000. 
 
 HEROISM IN THE SICK-ROOM. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 IS THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS OF HUMAN OR 
 DIVINE INSTITUTION ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 WHY DID GOD BECOME MAN ? Scotist doctrine. 8 pp. 
 $5 per 1,000. 
 
 WHO FOUNDED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ? 4 ppw 
 ■5 ctQtt per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
EXCLUSIVENESS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH/ 
 Explanation of ** out of the Church there is no salvation." 4 pp. 
 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW TO KEEP LENT. What is meant by prayer and 
 fasting. 4 pp. 35 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 IS IT HONEST? Controversial. 4pp. 25 cts. per 100; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ? Controversial. The 
 Church and the Sacraments. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 
 1,000. 
 
 THE RELIGION I WANT. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 
 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW TO HAVE A HAPPY CHRISTMAS. A good Con- 
 fession is the best remedy for the blues. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW'S THAT ? Short explanations of Catholic doctrines 
 and practices. Nos. I. and II, 4 pp. each. 25 cts. per 100 ; ^2.50^ 
 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT THINK YE OF MARY ? WHOSE MOTHER IS 
 SHE ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 CONVERTED BY AN INFIDEL. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 POPERY AND THE APOSTLES ; or, The Biter Bit. 
 The Church of to-day is the same as the Church of the Apostles, 
 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per i.ooo. 
 
 THE LOVE OF JE^S CHRIST. We love Him because 
 He loves us. Because of His benefits. Because He has given 
 Himself to us. Because our future depends on Him. 4 pp. 25 
 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE POPE'S TEMPORAL POWER. What it means. 
 Why he must be independent. Objections and answers. 4 pp. 
 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 A SHORT READING FOR THE SICK, (i) Patience in 
 pain. (2) Temptations of the sick. (3) Submit to God's will. 
 (4) Hope for special help at the hour of death. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 
 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 IS IT TRUE ? The Bible myths of Protestants. The story 
 about Latin in the Church. That our religion is all ceremony. 
 That it is false because of bad popes or priests. That confession 
 increases sin. That only ignorant Catholics are sincere. 4 pp. 
 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 BE SURE YOU ARE RIGHT AND THEN GO AHEAD. 
 Questions of Protestants about our faith and practice answered. 
 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 PROGRESS IN RELIGION. The teaching Church decides 
 our faith for us. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW TO GET MARRIED. Do not marry a Protestant ; 
 marry a Catholic with Banns, Confession, Mass, and Holy Com- 
 munion. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW TO DIE. Prepare : (i) By a good life. (2) By re- 
 ceiving the last Sacraments before half dead. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 
 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 SALLY BRANCH. The old Church : a narrative of a con- 
 version. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 ^ SOMETHING ABOUT INDULGENCES. How to gaim 
 lh«m. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
HOW TO FIND THE TRUE RELIGION. The Churdi, 
 not the Bible alone. Historical. 4 pp. 25 cts. per loo ; $2.5© 
 
 per 1,000. 
 
 SAINT WORSHIP. " The one mediator." 4 pp. 25 cts. 
 per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 SAINT WORSHIP. The invocation of saints explained. 
 How they hear us, etc. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE LAST OF THE POPE. A short history of the perse- 
 eutioDS of the Papacy. Fallacies of Protestants exposed. 4 pp. 
 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 BAPTISM. lis necessity. Effect. The minister. The cere- 
 monies, etc. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 HOW TO MAKE A GOOD CONFESSION. An excellent 
 Mission instruction. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS. Its 
 history. The theologfy of it. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 NO SECT IN HEAVEN. If there are no sects in Heaven 
 there should be none on earth. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 
 
 TjCOO. 
 
 THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
 per IOC ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 DEVOTION TO THE ANGELS. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE. What some Protestants say 
 about our perfect Church. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 PURGATORY AND PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD. 8 pp. 
 $5 per 1,000. 
 
 A PASTOR'S PLAIN TALK TO HIS PEOPLE. Duties 
 of the people to their parish Church. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 
 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT DO CATHOLICS BELIEVE ? Brief Exposition 
 of the doctrines taught by the Church. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
 $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT CATHOLICS DO NOT BELIEVE. 4 pp. 25 cts, 
 per loo ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 WHY I AM A CATHOLIC. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 SHALL OUR CHILDREN BE CHRISTIANS ? On edu- 
 cation. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE USE OF THE BIBLE AMONG THE LAITY. 8 pp. 
 $5 per 1,000. 
 
 A COMPANION TO HIGH MASS. For the use of non- 
 Catholics. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 THE REAL PRESENCE. The Historic Belief of Chris^ 
 tians. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 
 
 WHAT ARE WE DOING FOR NON-CATHOLICS? 
 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
 THE USE OF THE BIBLE AMONG THE LAITY. 
 8 PP* $5 per 1,000. 
 
 THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON SUNDAY OBSERV 
 ANCE. 4 pp. 3.5 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 
 
i