We had written thus far, when we received an unexpected answer to our question in the following letter from a charitable Catholic lady:
To The Editor OfThe Catholic World:
Rev. Father:The thought of doing something for the neglected children of New York prompts me to write to you. Since the moment that I read the letter that you published inThe Catholic World, they have scarcely been out of my mind. I have offered up all my prayers and communions for them, and I have prayed especially for them every day. I had no thought that I could do anything else, but sometimes I think that, if all should content themselves with praying, there would be nothing done. I am afraid I cannot do much, for I do not know how to begin, and I have so little confidence and I know so few people. But I felt as if I could not pray any more without trying to do something also. Perhaps the work could be begun by an appeal something like the following:
To Catholic Mothers."Of forty thousand vagrant children in New York we cannot doubt that far more than one half have inherited the Catholic faith."—Catholic Worldfor Aug. 1868.More than twenty thousand Catholic children in New York, homeless, uncared for, ignorant, and abandoned! Can we Catholic mothers think of this and sit quietly in our homes with our little ones around us? Can we shut from our ears their cries of sorrow, from our eyes their little forms trembling with cold and hunger, or from our hearts the thought of their desolation? No, we cannot, and we would not; for is it not most especially our right, our duty, and our privilege to do for them? Our priests are overworked, they cannot do everything; let us, then, beg their blessing and begin this noble undertaking. We have not much to do, only to prepare the way. The Sisters of Charity or Mercy are ready and longing to care for these little desolate ones. We have only to put the means in their hands. Already a Catholic lady of New York has given one thousand dollars for this end, and we have only to follow her as far as we are able. I think ten others can be found in our city to imitate her example. If we can, let us give largely, for it is but lending to the Lord; if we have but little, let us give of that, not forgetting that the widow's mite was more than all else cast into the treasury. Shall we let the snows of another winter find these little ones still unclothed and unsheltered; shall we let their souls perish here in the midst of churches and altars, while our priests and missionaries in distant lands are shedding their blood for the heathen? Let us Christian mothers begin our work earnestly, let us pray and labor for these little ones; they are here in our midst, and before God we are responsible for them.Respectfully, ——
Our correspondent, we believe, has gone to work in the right way, and, unless we greatly misjudge the Catholic ladies of New York, her appeal will be heard. The best plan, we think, would be to establish, in the heart of the poorer quarters of the city, a mission-house under the charge of Sisters of Charity, or Sisters of Mercy, who should make it their whole business to visit the destitute in their homes, teach them how to lead decent lives, see that their children were brought into Sunday and day-schools, that the whole family went to mass and confession, and that the children received proper care at home. It is much better to persuade parents to train up their offspring properly than to take the children out of their hands and rear them in mission-houses and asylums. The family relation ought to be rigidly respected; for God's plan of education is a good deal better than anything we can invent in place of it. For homeless and orphan children, the Sisters might see that admission was procured into the Catholic establishments already provided for those classes; for the sick and the starving they would ask relief from the charitable throughout the city, and whatever we placed in their hands we might be sure would be judiciously distributed.There are generous Catholic women enough in New York to the foundation of such a house, and provide for the support of a small community to take charge of it; and there are many who would highly value the privilege of co-operating with the Sisters in their holy work. Let them come forth, effect an organization under the sanction of the ecclesiastical authority of the diocese, begin at once to raise the money required, and a great undertaking, the parent of many others, will be effected. When we once get into the way of practical benevolence, we shall be surprised to see how easily one foundation will follow another, and how the habit of alms-deeds will become so fixed that it will seem easier and more natural to give than to refrain from giving.
Symbolism; or, Exposition of the Doctrinal Differences between Catholics and Protestants, as evidenced by their Symbolical Writings.By John A. Moehler, D.D.Translated from the German, with a Memoir of the Author, preceded by an Historical Sketch of the state of Protestantism and Catholicism in Germany for the last hundred years.By J. B. Robertson.New edition, revised and annotated by the Translator.One vol. 8vo, pp. 504,New York: The Catholic Publication Society. 1868.
The Symbolism of Dr. Möhler is, perhaps, the most remarkable polemical work which has appeared since the days of Bellarmine and Bossuet. Its influence in Germany has been extraordinary, and the translation by Mr. Robertson has exerted an influence of similar importance in Great Britain and the United States, as well as in every part of the world where English is spoken. The late illustrious convert from the Protestant Episcopal hierarchy, Dr. Ives, was greatly indebted to this book for the convictions which brought him into the Church, and many others might doubtless say the same of themselves. It may be well to say, for the benefit of non-professional readers, that "Symbolism" in German phraseology means the exposition of symbols of faith or authorized formularies of doctrines, and that this work is a thorough discussion of the dogmatic differences between the Catholic Church and the principal Protestant denominations. The present edition is a very convenient one, in one volume, neatly executed and well printed. We cannot too earnestly recommend to our intelligent readers, who desire thorough and solid information on the great topics of Catholic doctrine, to study carefully this great masterpiece of learning and thought.
The Pope And The Church Considered In Their Mutual Relations With Reference To The Errors Of The High Church Party In England.By the Rev. Paul Bottalla, S.J.,Professor of Theology in St. Beuno's College, North Wales.Part I. The Supreme Authority of the Pope.London: Burns, Gates & Co. 1868.The Apostolical And Infallible Authority Of The Pope.By F. X. Weninger, D.D., S.J.New York: Sadlier. Cincinnati: John P. Walsh. 1868.
The first named of these two works is one of the very best and most learned treatises on the subject discussed which has appeared in the English language, and will prove an invaluable addition to every clergyman's or educated layman's library. It is, moreover, of very moderate size, and written with remarkable logical terseness and lucidness of style and order.
The second work also contains a valuable and extensive collection of authorities and testimonies to the supreme teaching authority of the Holy See, and arésuméof the arguments usually given by theologians in support of the author's thesis. The moderate and gentle spirit in which the venerated author speaks of the adherents of another school of Catholic theologians is especially commendable and worthy of imitation, particularly as we are now awaiting the assembling of an Ecumenical Council, which will doubtless decide all questions heretofore in controversy in regard to which the good of the Church requires any clearer definitions than those which have been already made and universally accepted. There are some few corrections called for in the construction of the author's sentences, especially one which occurs in the note to page 206. The mechanical execution of the book cannot receive any high commendation.
The Illustrated Catholic Sunday-school Library.Second Series. Twelve volumes, pp. 144 each.New York: The Catholic Publication Society,126 Nassau street. 1868.
The titles of the volumes in this series are as follows:
Nettlethorpe, the Miser;Tales of Naval and Military Life;Harry O'Brien, and Other Tales;The Hermit of Mount Atlas;Leo, or The Choice of a Friend;Antonio, or The Orphan of Florence;Tales of the South of France;Stories of Other Lands;Emma's Cross, and Other Tales;Uncle Edward's Stories;Joe Baker;The Two Painters.
These tales were evidently selected with good taste and sound judgment. All are interesting, of a high moral tone, and well adapted to carry out the praiseworthy object for which this "library" was intended: furnishing Catholic youth of both sexes with reading matter both useful and entertaining.
These volumes, in diversity of scene, variety of incident, etc., fully equal those which appeared in the "First Series;" while in external elegance, and in beauty of illustration, they are decidedly superior. We find one fault, however. Considering how far girls outnumber boys in our Sunday-schools, we think it hardly fair that but one volume should be devoted to the joys and sorrows, the temptations and triumphs, of girlhood. In our opinion, several volumes in each series should be, in an especial manner, set apart for their particular pleasure and benefit. We hope our suggestion will be, if possible, acted upon in the next series.
Leaf And Flower Pictures, And How To Make Them.New York: Anson D. F. Randolph. 1868.
This pleasantly written and instructive little work is dedicated most affectionately to the authoress's "Two dear little 'Doppies,'" two little girls named respectively Nellie and Anna, who one day 'dopted her for their aunt. Hence their name. Whoever H. B. may be, (for this is all that is given us to know of this good "aunt,") we are sure that many persons who are interested in the delightful recreation of making leaf and flower pictures will thank her for the composition of this book. That our readers may understand its object, we quote from the preface: "I think even quite small children, both boys and girls, as well as older persons, will find it delightful to make themselves pictures, and have a collection 'of their own' of all sorts of leaves, mosses, grasses, flowers, and lichens. Will it not add greatly to the pleasure of being out of doors, if, in every walk you take, from May to October, you carry home some leaf, or flower, or spike of grass, to add to the treasures of yourhortus siccus, or to lay aside until the long cold hours of winter come, when, in varnishing and arranging them as pictures and decorations, you can almost restore to yourself the delight of your summer rambles, and make into a permanent and abiding pleasure a portion of the beauty which then charmed and refreshed your soul? Therefore, dear reader, be you child or woman, boy or man, if you would open your eyes some frosty morning next January, and behold a lovely wreath of flowers blooming upon the walls of your chamber, with all the freshness of June—a wreath that Jack Frost cannot wither, even if he has sent the mercury out of sight below zero—read this little book; for you can have one by following its directions."
Personal Sketches Of His Own Times.By Sir Jonah Barrington, Judge of the High Court of the Admiralty in Ireland, etc., etc.One vol. 12mo.The Life Of The Right Honorable John Philpot Curran,Late Master Of The Rolls In Ireland.By his son, William Henry Curran.With additions and notes by R. Shelton Mackenzie, D.C.L.One vol. 12mo.Sketches Of The Irish Bar.By the Right Hon. Richard Lalor Sheil, M.P.With Memoir and Notes by R. Shelton Mackenzie, D.C.L.Two volumes, pp. 388, 380.New York: W. J. Widdleton. 1868.
Above we give the titles of three works which have been out of print for some time, but new editions of which have just appeared. Sheil's "Sketches," commenced in 1822 and continued until 1829, embrace short, piquant biographies of the most prominent members of the Irish Bar—O'Connell, Plunket, Burke, O'Loghlin, Norbury, etc.; with incidental allusions to other celebrities—Lady Morgan, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Robert Emmet, etc., etc. There are, in addition, the author's personal recollections of the Catholic Association in 1823; of the visit of the Catholic deputation to London in 1825, and its reception in the House of Commons; and of the great Clare Election in 1828.
Barrington's Sketches are also racy and piquant, and give an insight into Irish manners and customs fifty years ago. The "Life of Curran" has been a standard work, and this new edition will bring it anew before the rising generation.
The Works Of Rev. Arthur O'leary, O.S.F.Edited by a clergyman of Massachusetts.One vol. 8vo, pp. 596.Boston: Patrick Donahoe. 1868.
The reputation of F. O'Leary is universal among all who take an interest in Irish history and literature. His works, which abound with learning, humor, and passages of remarkably fine writing of the rich, ornate style of the old school, have been carefully edited by the learned clergyman whose name is modestly withheld on the title-page, and published in good style by Mr. Donahoe. We thank them both for this valuable service to Catholic literature, and have no suggestion to make, except that the small number of typographical errors which have escaped the vigilance of the proof-reader should be corrected in the second edition.
The Lily Of The Valley;or, Margie and I, and other Poems.By Amy Gray.Baltimore: Kelly & Piet. 1868.
The gentle authoress of these poems, which have, at least, the merit of conveying a genuine expression of her sentiments, presents the volume to the public with this preface, which we copy entire:
"The object of the publication of the poems, and in view of which most of them were written, is to aid in the education of destitute little girls of the South, orphaned by the late war. The author cannot hope for more than a mite from so small a volume—the production, too, of an unknown writer; but the proceeds, whatever they may be, will be unreservedly appropriated to the object above named. To an intelligent and generous reading public the author confides this little work, feeling sure that their generosity will secure for it a patronage that its intrinsic merit cannot hope to obtain. It was of old the duty and privilege of the chosen people of God to offer the first-fruits of all their possessions to his service; and it is with gratitude for many mercies received, and with earnest prayers for the divine blessing, that the author would dedicate the first-fruits of her pen to an object which seems in accordance with the teachings of our blessed Lord, who has said: 'Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.'"
Excelsior;or, Essays on Politeness, Education, and the Means of Attaining Success in Life.Part I. For young gentlemen. By T. E. Howard, A.M.Part II. For young ladies. By a lady, (R. V. R.)Baltimore: Kelly & Piet 1868.
A capital book, and one we would like to have placed in the hands of every student, boy or girl, in the country. It is not easy to write books of this character, at least books that young persons will read; but Mr. Howard and his gentle co-author have produced a volume as pleasantly written as it is solidly instructive. It is said that it requires a high degree of moral courage to purchase at the bookseller's a book "on politeness." We trust that few among our young friends will be wanting in this courage when the purchase of the present volume is concerned, and we will guarantee that not one will fail to peruse it with very great pleasure.
Mac Carthy More; or, The Fortunes of an Irish Chief in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.By Mrs. J. Sadlier.New York: D. & J. Sadlier & Co. Pp. 277. 1868.
This, the latest production of Mrs. Sadlier's prolific pen, is in no wise inferior to its predecessors. The incidents which form its groundwork are strictly historical, and can be found inThe Life and Letters of Florence Mac Carthy Reagh, Tanist of Carberry, Mac Carthy Mor, compiled from unpublished documents in her Majesty's State Paper Office, by Daniel Mac Carthy, (Glas,) and published by Longman & Co., London. For those who cannot afford to purchase the more expensive English work, Mrs. Sadlier's condensation of the life and times of the great Irish chieftain will prove a very agreeable substitute. Besides being thus presented under the guise of a graceful little story, they will doubtless be more acceptable to most readers than the dry and prosaic details of mere historical narration.
Plain Talk About The Protestantism Of To-day.From the French of Mgr. Segur.Boston: P. Donahoe. 1868.
The best word we can say about this little book is to copy the first few lines of the translator's note:
"You ask me, dear sir, 'What makes me so anxious to publish this work in America?' Well, I wish to have it published for the sake of Catholic children tending common schools—of Catholic girls living out in families—of Catholic boys serving their time—of all dear and poor friends so often wounded in the affections dearest to their hearts, and whose religion is so often attacked in rude words. I herewith hope to place in their hands such arms as they can easily use, and which will have a telling effect on the enemies of their faith."
Mignon. A Tale.Translated from the French.New York: P. O'Shea. Pp. 202. 1868.
A charming little story, neatly got up; but the pleasure to be derived from its perusal would, however, be considerably increased if the thread of the narrative were not so often and so needlessly broken by whole pages devoted to sentimentalisms of the shallowest type.
Vol. VIII., No. 45 December, 1868.
The craving for opiates indicates either pain or restlessness. The wounded man longs for that which may dull the sensation of physical suffering and procure the temporary oblivion of sleep. One who is wearied by the morbid activity of his brain, and the lassitude which is caused by it, desires some artificial remedy to give him the repose which refuses to come naturally to his sleepless eyelids. A person in health has no need, and, consequently, no desire for opiates. His activity is healthful and pleasurable; his weariness is natural, making rest pleasant, and giving sound, recreative slumbers. In like manner, when one begins to talk about a craving for an intellectual or spiritual opiate, the presence of some malady making the soul restless is manifest. Its activity is morbid and irregular, preventing that repose which is the natural consequence of a perfectly sound and normal condition of the mental and spiritual faculties.
These remarks were suggested by reading, in an article written with much refinement of taste and delicacy of sentiment in one of our principal literary papers, [Footnote 122] the following passage on the hypnotic qualities of Catholicity:
[Footnote 122:The Nation, August 18th, 1868; Review of Mrs. Craven'sSister's Story.]
"Mrs. Craven certainly offers very abundant and convincing testimony on this point—a point which probably no one ever dreams of controverting. Given natures like these, in which the emotional element entirely predominates; to which the pursuit of truth, as an ultimate object, is totally incomprehensible; which crave happiness and repose with a passionate longing, and the Church certainly offers a satisfactory and comprehensive solution of all their difficulties.We should all be Catholics were it not that the Church sets too high a price upon her opiates. One generally pays for extreme wealth of emotional power by a corresponding poverty of judgment, and though, if we had our choice, we might all be willing to be born blind, that we might never feel afraid in the dark, the settlement of the matter is certainly not optional with us. It is a congenital impossibility for some people to conceive of their natural passions, of their judgment, will, and reason, as mere counters with which they can purchase eternal rest, and a tardy but complete gratification of the wants which are here unsupplied. Such people do not, in rejecting Catholicism, necessarily disavow the yearning for this rest, nor the belief that it will be attained.The craving is universal, the Church's answer only partial—it allows the claims of the emotions, but it disallows those of the intellect. There is no doubt that she does her legitimate work well and thoroughly, that she gives hope to the despairing, comfort to the sorrowing, and sometimes mends the morals of the vicious—we quarrel with her only because in virtue of doing this she claims the right to outrage or ignore wants yet profounder than those which she supplies."
We have selected this passage as the theme of some brief discussion, without any reference to the particular topic of the article in which it is contained, or intention of raising any special controversy with the writer of it, whose personality is entirely unknown to us. It has struck our attention simply as a remarkably tangible and felicitous expression of a sentiment or opinion shared in common by a large class of minds, and well worthy of our most serious consideration. They think that those who have embraced the Catholic religion have been driven, by the unrest and weariness of the soul, to take a spiritual opiate—a metaphorical expression, but one whose meaning is so obvious that it needs no explanation. They acknowledge the existence of the same unrest in their own souls, but refuse to accept the remedy offered by the Catholic Church, because they imagine that it can only produce its effect of relieving the pain of the soul by superinducing an artificial sleep of the intellect. The mind must slumber, intelligence must cease its activity, in order that the heart may be made peaceful and happy in the practice of the Catholic religion. They are unwilling to purchase rest at such a price, and, it may be, would be unable to do it if they were willing. Therefore, they prefer to endure the pain of doubt, the restlessness of scepticism, the weariness of a yearning after an unknown good, in the vague expectation of finding it at some distant period, if not in this world, yet in some future sphere of existence. The objection of these persons to Catholicity is, that it does not acknowledge or adequately satisfy the just demands of the intellect. Those who embrace it, they say, cannot justify their conversion on rational grounds, or allege sufficient and conclusive evidence of the truth of its doctrines. They have either never sought for a religion which satisfies reason, or have abandoned their search in despair, and laid their intellect to sleep upon the soft pillow of an unreasoning submission to an authority that supersedes all exercise of thought, and quiets all action of intelligence. The correctness of this assumption is the precise topic of discussion we now propose. It is evidently altogether useless to frame an argument on the supposition that we have to deal with any form of Protestant orthodoxy, so-called. Persons who profess to believe in a definite system of doctrine as revealed truth cannot admit any such unsatisfied yearnings after truth as those are whose existence is denoted by the writer of the paragraphs we have cited. It is, therefore, useless to take as data any of the principles or doctrines of the common Protestant theology. It is with a sceptical state of mind we have to deal, which rejects every received version of Christianity as incomplete and unsatisfactory, however it may admit, in a general way, that Christianity itself is something divine. We think we may take it for granted that the very state of mind indicated by the language on which we are commenting has been produced by a revolt of the reason against Protestant theology. Probably those whose sentiments are represented by this language have been more or less strictly educated in the tenets of some one of the Protestant churches.They have found these tenets to be absurd—incredible; based on no solid evidence; mere individual theories, contradicted by the facts of history and the dictates of mature reason. They have, consequently, abjured all allegiance to any sect or school of Protestant Christianity, and have fallen back upon their own reason as the exponent of the Christian religion, and of all other religions, as the only criterion of truth in all orders of thought, and the only guide which has been given to man amid the perplexities which beset his intellect on every side. The Catholic system of doctrines is supposed to be essentially the same with orthodox Protestantism,plusa few more dogmas, a system of elaborate ceremonial, and a peculiar hierarchical organization, which openly claims and enforces submission to its own doctrinal decisions and moral precepts as infallible and supreme. The same absurdities which exist in the Protestant system of theology are supposed to be contained also in the Catholic system. It does not occur to these persons that these absurdities maybe traced to exaggerated or distorted theories respecting the ancient dogmas of Christianity, which are rejected by the Catholic theology, and to the incompleteness of the Protestant systems, which are built up from fragments of the sublime edifice they have destroyed, without plan, order, or architectural harmony. This is, however, the fact; and when we speak of the unreasonableness of the orthodox Protestant form of Christianity as the occasion and temptation to scepticism, we must be understood to speak in accordance with this fact. We do not mean to say that the evidences of the divine revelation and truth of Christianity, and a vast body of true and reasonable doctrines, are not retained in the Protestant teaching, or that it makes scepticism justifiable. We merely intend to say that it does not satisfy reason or command assent as a system in all its essential parts, and therefore leaves the mind in a bewilderment by its partial truths and partial errors, which is the occasion of a kind of intellectual despair, resulting frequently in scepticism. The truly rational part would be to hold on to the conviction of the great facts of Christianity and its substantial truth, and to search for some more reasonable and satisfactory exposition of the true meaning of Christianity than that given by these self-constituted, unauthorized, and mutually conflicting expositors of divine revelation. Such a search would inevitably land the honest and persevering seeker in the Catholic Church, as it has done so many and will so many more in time to come. There is a divine philosophy in the Catholic religion which satisfies all the legitimate demands of reason—that same philosophy which attracted Dionysius of Athens, Sergius Paulus, Cornelius, Pudens, Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Clement, Pantaenus, St. Augustine, and a host of other noble intellects, to Christianity in the days of old, and in which they found that perennial source of truth from which Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, Lao-Tseu and Confucius, had only drawn some rills.
It is not within the scope of our thesis to show positively the truth of the above affirmation. We merely intend to show that it is made; that the church does not "disallow the claims of the intellect," or "claim the right to outrage or ignore wants yet profounder than those which she supplies;" that "the pursuit of truth as an ultimate object" is not "totally incomprehensible" to those who yield the allegiance of their minds to the light of faith; that they do not "conceive of their judgment, will, and reason, as mere counters with which to purchase eternal rest."Whether the Catholic solution of the problems of reason is objectively the true one is not the direct aim of our reasoning. The point is, whether Catholic theology and philosophy propose any solution at all; whether any class of minds who seek earnestly after such a solution find one which they hold and maintain to be completely satisfactory to reason in the Catholic Church. The writer whose language we have quoted denies it, and Dr. Bellows has recently denied it, asserting boldly that those who have embraced the Catholic faith have done so by a reaction from an extreme rationalism into superstition. What is gratuitously asserted may be gratuitously denied, and we deny it accordingly. Some few persons, perceiving that they were following principles which lead logically to Pantheism and Atheism, and that there is no real logical alternative of the denial of God except Catholicity, have been led to examine and embrace the Catholic faith. Neither Dr. Bellows nor any other person professing to be rational is entitled to call this act a superstitious one, unless it can be shown that the motives of it are reducible to an irrational credulity, or a voluntary submission to some claim of supernatural authority which is destitute of probability, on grounds which are incapable of convincing a prudent man. The remark of Dr. Bellows is, therefore, simply an intolerable impertinence. The statement which he makes is, moreover, false in point of fact, since a large proportion of modern converts to the Catholic Church have travelled the road of orthodox Protestantism, and not that of rationalism.
It is no less incorrect to state that it is only persons in whom the sentimental element predominates who find satisfaction for the wants of their souls in the Catholic religion. In the first place, it is absurd to suppose that the legitimate cravings or aspirations of any one part of human nature can be satisfied completely by that which is not real, and therefore not true. Truth, goodness, and beauty are identical in respect to their being or reality. The religion which is adapted to one class of minds is adapted to all. It is, moreover, incorrect to reduce all men to two classes—those who are led by the logical faculty, and those who are led by sensibility. The intelligence has its intuitions in an order of thought far superior to the mere understanding. The will has also a sublime range in an order far superior to the sphere of sensible emotions. Those who never occupy their minds in any metaphysical or theological speculations whatever may, therefore, in their spiritual nature, apprehend divine truth far more immediately and perfectly, and may possess the truest and highest wisdom in a much more eminent sense, than the most acute philosopher. The interior or spiritual life, moreover, of those persons who are rather seeking to perfect their souls in virtue than their intellects in knowledge, is by no means a life of indulgence in pleasurable emotions, the enjoyments of sensible devotion, or anything else which gives sensitive nature the pabulum or the opiates after which it hankers. This whole order of ideas belongs to sentimental Protestantism, and is totally alien from Catholic ascetics, as is well known to the youngest novice in any religious community.
Of course we cannot expect literary gentlemen to understand these matters, and cannot wonder at the mistakes they make when they write about them. We can justly require of them nothing more than a supreme love of truth for its own sake, and a willingness to see it when it is presented to them. Any one who loves the truth on this point sufficiently to read Rodriguez onChristian Perfection, F. Baker'sSancta Sophia, or F. Faber'sGrowth in Holiness, can satisfy himself of the very low estimate in which sensible devotion is held by our spiritual writers. If he should wish for a more extensive course of reading, we would recommend Tauler's Sermons and the works of St. John of the Cross. He will there see that the pleasures of sensibility, imagination, taste, the affections, the romance and poetry of religion, are not condemned or rudely trampled on, but simply relegated to the lowest place, made use of as the waiting-maids of the divine wisdom and strong virtue which constitute solid perfection. The Catholic religion satisfies not merely the emotional nature of man, but his spiritual nature. It could not do this unless it were capable of placing the soul in its true relation to its proper object, to its final end, to its real destiny, and furnishing it with all the means of advancing continually toward the union with God in which beatitude consists. It could not be capable of doing this unless it came from God; and, coming from God, it must teach the truth which is necessary and adequate to the perfection of the reason, as well as the perfection of the will. We will take up the question, however, in a more historical and inductive manner, in order to show, as a matter of fact, that those minds in which the logical faculty and the taste for the cultivation of pure reason is more strongly developed and active, find an equal scope and satisfaction in Catholicity with the other class above mentioned.
One needs but a moderate acquaintance with the method and spirit which have always prevailed in the great Catholic schools to know how powerfully they stimulate the activity of the intellect, awaken the thirst for rational investigation, encourage the effort to penetrate as far as possible into the domain of ideal truth, and to trace the relations of all things in the world of thought to their first and final cause. The basis and foundation of the whole structure of the higher education, especially in the department of theology, is laid in a thorough training in logic and philosophy. The same logical and philosophical method pervades the entire system of theological instruction. Every dogma of faith, every opinion of the schools, every principle of philosophy, is subjected to a rigid and critical analysis, including an examination of all the difficulties and objections which have ever been raised by the adversaries of the Church, during all past ages and in the present. In the theses which the students of theology and philosophy are obliged to defend, covering the whole field of these higher sciences, sceptical, atheistical, pantheistic, infidel, and heretical arguments, stated with the utmost logical subtlety of which the objector is possessed, are presented without any restriction or reserve, not only by other pupils but by the professors and other learned theologians. In the universities, colleges, and religious houses, where bodies of men are collected possessing the means and requisites for a life of study and learned labor, there is every facility and inducement afforded for the most thorough prosecution of every branch of human knowledge which can possibly have any bearing on the advancement of the queen and mistress of all sciences, theology.Moreover, in modern times there has sprung up among the educated laity, among the statesmen, professional men, scholars, and gentlemen of leisure and intellectual tastes, a school of students and authors in the same high department of thought, independent, so far as their private and temporal interests are concerned, of any ecclesiastical authority, and free to follow the dictates of their reason and conscience wherever these may lead them. It is the easiest thing in the world to make a catalogue of names, illustrious among the advocates and defenders of the Church, in whom the intellectual powers have been, through the force of native genius and acquired culture, brought to the highest grade of development. Bellarmine, Suarez, Canus, Cajetan, Sfondrati, Petavius, Molina, Gerdil, Thomassin, Mabillon, Muratori, Bossuet, Malebranche, Des Cartes, Galluppi, Rosmini, Gioberti, Mastrofini, Mai, Mezzofanti, Görres, Möhler, Theiner, Lacordaire, Ozanam, Donoso Cortes, Balmes, Wiseman, England, Montalembert, De Broglie, Cantù; are these the names of men of weak judgment and strong emotions, who were mastered by an unreasoning, pietistic sentiment? Or, are they the names of hypocrites and impostors, who prostituted their genius to the support of a cause which they knew to be based on falsehood, illusion, and deceit? Listen to the words written from his couch of pain by Montalembert, near the close of the last volume of hisMonks of the West:
"The more I advance in my laborious and thankless task—that is to say, the nearer I approach to my grave—the more do I feel mastered and overpowered by an ardent and respectful love of truth, the more do I feel myself incapable of betraying truth, even for the benefit of what I most love here below. The mere idea of adding a shadow to those which already shroud it fills me with horror. To veil the truth, to hide it, to forsake it under the pretence of serving the cause of religion, which is nothing but supreme truth, would be, in my opinion, to aggravate a lie by a kind of sacrilege. Forgive me, all timid and scrupulous souls! But I hold that in history everything should be sacrificed to truth—that it must be always spoken, on every subject, and in its full integrity." [Footnote 123]
[Footnote 123:Monks of the West, vol. v. p. 305.]
Hear also the language used by the eminent historian Cesare Cantù:
"After having replaced Christianity face to face with history, with reason, with conscience; after having interpreted it with all liberty of mind, we feel ourselves confirmed in our respect for the Catholic tradition. We have drawn from our studies new motives for the conviction that the actual organization of the church is excellent, both for moderating in a suitable degree the sovereignty of the smaller number, while at the same time infusing a spirit of subordination into the masses, and also for procuring the largest possible dose of happiness for men; we mean by this that happiness which arises from the voluntary submission of their minds to a mild and persuasive moral power, and not to a mere coercive restraint." [Footnote 124]
[Footnote 124:La Réforme en Itilie, pref. p. xi.]
This is not the language of superstition or of unintelligent enthusiasm, but of calm, well-reasoned conviction, the language of men supremely devoted to the pursuit of truth for its own sake; and it is but a fair specimen of the language of all the great advocates of the Catholic religion. It would be utterly impossible for any system, destitute of solid foundations and unsupported by reasonable proofs, to endure the perpetual and thorough researches and investigations carried on by a vast body of learned men in the Catholic schools for ages, with the full approbation and encouragement of the highest authorities in the church. The theory that such a set of men could be made the dupes of an arbitrary authority administered with the intention of swaying the minds of men by a systematic violation of all the rights of reason, or made the partisans and upholders of what they knew to be an imposture, is too incredible for anything less than a boundless credulity to embrace.
Let us turn our attention now to that class of minds nurtured in anti-Catholic opinions, over whom the Catholic Church has regained in part or completely an influence, bringing them to the recognition of her divine authority. What is the force which has made itself felt at the great distance to which the Protestant mind has been violently thrown by the revolution of the sixteenth century, and which has drawn back toward the Catholic centre a body of persons who cannot be either ignored or despised without the most stolid prejudice or the sheerest affectation? Is it a mere force which is capable of acting only on the emotions, the imagination, the sensible portion of the nature of individuals in whom reason does not exercise her just and rightful supremacy? Are there none who have been led by the philosophy of history, by metaphysics, by theological reasoning, by the investigation of Scripture, by the search for a supreme and universal science, by the deductions of logic, and the inductions of experience and observation, to a calm and rational conviction that the highest wisdom and the most perfect law are embodied in the Catholic Church? The statement of Lord Macaulay is familiar to all, that the doctrines of the Catholic Church have heretofore commanded the assent of the wisest and best of mankind, and may therefore command the assent of men similar to them in the future. A fair examination of the question will convince any one of the fact, which cannot be gainsaid by any one professing to love the truth supremely for its own sake, that numbers of men fully qualified to judge of evidence and to comprehend the most abstruse reasoning have given the homage of their minds to Catholic doctrine precisely because of the invincible logic both of facts and arguments by which its truth was demonstrated to their reason.
Leibnitz is one instance in point. Although he never joined the communion of the Catholic Church, yet the whole weight of his authority as a philosopher and a theologian is on the side of the Catholic principles and doctrines, which are the most obnoxious to our modern rationalists. The same is true of Baron Stark, the author of theBanquet of Theodulus. The celebrated Leo, one of the greatest historians of Germany, began his career as a Pantheist, and by his profound historical studies was brought to a full conviction of the divine authority of revelation, and of the necessity of a return to the communion of the Holy See on the part of all the dissentient and separated communions. HisUniversal Historyis an irrefutable argument for the truth of Christianity and the authority of the Roman Church. Although, therefore, none of these three distinguished men can be counted among the converts to the Catholic Church, yet their names can be cited in support of the position we have taken, since we are persuaded that our candid opponents will admit that strict logical consistency would require any one admitting their premises to draw the practical conclusion that it is obligatory on his conscience to become a member of the Catholic Church.
Hurter, Phillipps, and Stolberg are instances of German scholars whom profound and learned studies brought to a full Catholic conviction. Mayne de Biran is an example of a philosopher, who reasoned himself out of infidelity into a firm conviction of the truth of the Catholic religion by a metaphysical process. Passing by those well-known persons in England and America whose education was ecclesiastical, we may cite an Englishman, Sir George Bowyer, and an American, Judge Burnett, first governor of California, as instances of men who applied the principles of law and jurisprudence to the evidence of the claims of the Catholic Church, and were led to submit to them by a process of legal argument, which the latter gentleman has developed at length in his able work, entitledThe Path which led a Protestant Lawyer to the Catholic Church. The late Dr. Bellinger, of Charleston, S. C., a physician who stood at the head of the medical profession in his State, devoted thirteen years to a careful study of the Catholic doctrines, before he publicly embraced them.
Among those who have devoted their pens to the Catholic cause in our own country, whether they have been educated to the Catholic faith or have been converted to it from Protestantism, without doubt the man who surpasses all others in intellectual power is Dr. Brownson. No one would think of reckoning him among devotees ordilettanti. If Dr. Bellows were to express his opinion upon the motives which induced him to submit his masculine intelligence to the teaching of the church, he would probably acknowledge that he had him chiefly in view when he made the statement referred to in a former part of this article. That is, he would say that Dr. Brownson's conversion to Catholicity was an act of intellectual despair, a suicide committed by his reason because of its failure to attain by its own efforts that transcendental science after which it was aspiring. The reply to this is the same which AEschylus made before the judge at whose tribunal he was accused of having lost the use of his reason through old age. He recited a play which he had recently composed, as evidence that his intellect still remained in its pristine vigor. And so Dr. Brownson may with equal justice point to the unanswered and unanswerable works which his pen has produced since his conversion, and challenge those who pretend that he has yielded his mind to an irrational superstition to refute the arguments of hisEssaysandThe Convert. The mere effort to read understandingly the latter book is the severest tax which any ordinary brain can submit to. The philosophical articles published in theReview, which Dr. Brownson conducted with such remarkable ability for a long period, surpass by far any specimens of metaphysical writing contained in the English language. The frivolity of the age, and various causes connected with temporary and personal controversies, have prevented the full recognition of the value and merit of these philosophical essays, which it is probable they will receive in the future time. The doctor has written a vast amount on a great number of topics both ecclesiastical and secular, since he devoted his labors to the Catholic cause, and no doubt there are many inconsistent and varying opinions to be found in his works, especially in regard to matters outside the domain of pure philosophy and theology. Nevertheless, in our judgment, which we believe posterity will ratify, the pure gold stands in a very large proportion to the ore, and will only become brightened and purified by the severest tests of the crucible which reduces every reputation to its just dimensions.We believe that Dr. Brownson's writings contain the most complete refutation of the sceptical, pantheistic, sensist, and pseudo-inductive or positivist errors of the day, as well as of the chief heterodox systems of doctrine. In that noblest and most essential portion of philosophy which includes ontology and theodicy, he has laid down the metaphysical basis of natural theology with a Platonic depth and an Aristotelian precision of reasoning. Beside the massive structure of arguments respecting the positive evidences of the authority and infallibility of the church which he has erected, a work in which he has many able compeers, who though not more logical are more erudite than himself, he has thrown out some masterpieces in that more difficult and more rarely executed branch of labor, the exposition of the hidden, abstruse harmonies between rational truths and the mysteries of faith. Prescinding all question respecting the fact of his having presented the Catholic doctrine in such a light as to demonstrate its reasonableness, which is not the point at issue, he has at least attempted it. He has shown that a man can be a thorough-going, orthodox Catholic, and at the same time a philosopher in the highest and best sense of the word.
These instances are only examples and illustrations of a general rule. The two maxims of St. Augustine,intellectum valde ama, andfides quaerens intellectumhave always been and are now maxims of the Catholic schools. The church has no fear of light, no dread of the progress of science; in point of fact, the greatest obstacles which advocates of the Catholic cause have to contend with are ignorance, disregard of the laws of logic, and the lack of belief in the reality and certainty of the affirmations or judgments of pure reason. It is only slowly and with great difficulty that we can get the public either of writers or readers to pay attention to the facts of history, and cast away the fables with which they have been duped themselves and duping others for so long. It is equally difficult to force the controversy respecting philosophical and theological principles to the true logical issues, to get attention to our arguments, or to extract from our opponents any clear and distinct answers to them, or definite and precise statements of their own positions. Bishop England scarcely did anything else in his masterly controversies than to point out the rules of logic violated by his opponents, and the misstatements of historical facts and Catholic doctrines made by them. The truth is, that our conflict is far less with any positive system of heterodoxy or rationalism than with a vague but universal scepticism. It is not so much that men disbelieve in the specific doctrines of revelation, as that they disbelieve in the existence of any truth. The power of reason, the capacity of the intellect to grasp the intelligible, the certainty of rational principles and logical deductions, the dignity of philosophy, are not exaggerated, they are depreciated. Those who revolt from the legitimate and supreme authority of God, divine revelation, and the infallible teaching of the church over the mind of man, are not the legitimate offspring of the ancient philosophers, or the true continuators of philosophy. The ancient philosophers of Greece and China recognized the need of a divine revelation, a supernatural light, a teacher sent from God. The whole civilized world of heathenism was gasping in agony for the advent of the divine Redeemer when he appeared on the earth.Our modern self-styled rationalists have turned their backs on that light toward which Lao-Tseu, Confucius, Socrates, and Plato had their faces turned; and they have cut themselves loose from the traditional wisdom, not only of Christianity and Judaism, but of all the sages of heathendom and of the whole human race. Consequently, they are smitten with intellectual death, they cannot advance or construct; they can only go backward, destroy, doubt, deny, groan with despairing agony, anddie. The modern literature of unbelief is either a sneer or a lament; as to philosophy, it has fallen into contempt, and is generally scouted. Those who profess to handle grave themes in earnest are usually inconsequent, vague, full of hypotheses and random statements; by their own confession mere wanderers in search of truth who have lost their way; rhetoricians, guessers, men who teach not as having authority, even the authority of reason, butas the Scribes. The few men who possess rare native philosophical genius, like Mill and Spencer, having no principles or data to begin with, imitate the great master of modern philosophical scepticism, Immanuel Kant, and pervert reason and logic into an instrument for destroying all true intellectual science. Mr. Mill denies that we know that it is a necessary and universal truth that two and two make four. It may be therefore that in some future state of existence he will have the same evidence that one is equal to two which he now has that one is only equal to one, and that he is therefore some one else as well as himself, and perhaps responsible for all the crimes committed by Caligula. Nevertheless, he assures us that the ideas of justice and right in God must be the same that they are in his own mind, and that if any punishment is inflicted on him hereafter, which does not accord with his present sense of justice, he will never admit the right of inflicting it. Yet, upon his own principles, he cannot be sure that his own ideas of right and justice will not be totally altered in the next world, and that his reason will not compel him to admit that what now seems to him unjust will then appear to be precisely the contrary. No matter, therefore, how absurd may be the doctrines which are professed as dogmas by any religious sect, no follower of Mr. Mill can have any right to reject them on purely rational grounds. Mr. Spencer laboriously argues to convince us that we are compelled by the principles of logic to admit the truth of a number of directly contradictory propositions, and that consequently all pure metaphysics are worthless, and all that is worth knowing is unknowable. When such laughable follies are seriously put forth and lauded to the skies as the sum of human wisdom in its most advanced stage of progress, and when the fanciful hypotheses of Darwin are vaunted as science by men who profess to follow the inductive philosophy, it is the turn of the advocates of revelation and the mysteries of the Catholic faith to cry out upon the outrage that is put upon reason, and to deride the credulity of those who can be duped by such crude absurdities. Human reason and the mind of man are indeed extremely weak and fallible if the estimate of them made by these sceptical writers is to be taken as correct. Weak and fallible as they are, and incapable of affirming anything in the order of pure reason and objective reality, according to this humiliating theory, yet nevertheless they can be forced to admit as much reality in the revealed truths of the Catholic faith as in anything else.The capacity of the mind to take note of particular facts and phenomena, and by induction to reduce these particulars to general laws, and also the necessity of following practical reason as an actual guide, will be admitted even by the most extreme unbelievers. The facts and phenomena produced by the action of the Catholic Church on the human race, and by Jesus Christ himself in his life, death, and resurrection, as observed and attested by competent witnesses, just as much warrant us in making the induction that he is a superhuman intelligence, as all the observations of astronomy warrant us in accepting the heliocentric theory of Copernicus. Practical reason tells us that the religion of Jesus Christ as explained by the Catholic Church is good for mankind, and the safest rule we can follow. If, therefore, we find probable evidence of the fact that Jesus Christ has taught certain doctrines through the church regarding that sphere of the unknowable into which reason cannot penetrate, it would seem to be the dictate of good sense and of a right conscience that we should submit to that teaching. The power of objecting to any doctrine that does not satisfy reason or apparently contradicts it has been surrendered. Reason cannot judge of the unknowable. We have all the certainty that the case admits of that Jesus Christ possesses a reason of higher order to which that which is unknowable to us is clearly intelligible, and that he has declared to us the truth of these doctrines. We have, moreover, evidence of his benevolence and veracity, and therefore all the motives which we are capable of appreciating combine to induce us to give the same assent to his teaching that we do to any generally received truths. Even on this low level, Christianity and Catholicity can stand their ground far better than any other subject of analytical investigation. It is true that logically and philosophically we attain only to the apparent and the abstract truth of Christianity. But if the individual asserts for himself, or the Catholic Church asserts for herself, a supernatural light, an illumination of the intellect giving certainty, how can the allegation be refuted? How can any advocate of the ignoramus theory show that, if we are naturally in such a deep darkness of the unknowable, it is not probable that God would send a ray of supernatural light to enlighten us? The natural outcry of one in such a state would be, "O my God! if there be a God, send the light of truth, if there is any truth, to enlighten my soul, if I have a soul!"
We will leave, however, this soft and marshy ground to those who like the prospect of fighting the enemies of Christianity in such a region of swamps and sloughs. We retort the charge of ignoring or outraging reason upon our adversaries in a far different way. We accuse them not only of rejecting revelation but of denying reason, and in their assault upon the supernatural order of subverting the natural order upon which it is based. We affirm that the Catholic Church not only protects revelation and grace, but reason and nature, by the aegis of her authority against a universal doubt or denial. She affirms the existence of the spiritual, thinking, reasoning principle in man as a truth known with infallible certainty by the very light of reason itself, and therefore affirms the intrinsic infallibility of reason within its proper sphere. It is to reason that it appertains to judge of the evidences of revelation. And although reason does not furnish a positive criterion wherewith to judge the intrinsic credibility of mysteries transcending the grasp of reason, yet it is acknowledged by all theologians that it is competent to apply a negative criterion and to reject whatever is proposed as a revealed truth which is evidently or demonstrably contrary to the principles of reason or to certain facts.Where now does the collision exist between reason and faith, science and revelation? Is the existence of God the point where reason is outraged? The advocates of the Catholic religion always profess to demonstrate that truth from reason, and it can hardly be pretended that their atheistical or pantheistical opponents have ever thoroughly refuted their arguments or demonstrated a contrary doctrine. The credibility of the divine revelation is also proved by evidence and argument, and it is certainly rather bold to say that this entire fabric of learning and thought is so palpably weak as to be an outrage on reason. The institution, authority, and infallibility of the Catholic Church are established in the same manner. And, although the mysteries of faith are not demonstrated by their nexus with necessary metaphysical truths, all the arguments brought from reason against them are repelled by similar arguments, and their harmony with rational truths is shown in so far as reason partially apprehends their relations. Wherein consists the palpable, open denial of the rights of reason? Is it denied that God can make a revelation of truths which surpass the grasp of reason, or that he has done it, or that the church has authority to proclaim it? At whatever point we are met by the accusation of professedly and openly denying the rights of reason and imposing on it a tyranny, or stupefying it by a soporific drug, that accusation must be specific and must be sustained by proofs. Vague assertions will not do. Where are the self-evident or demonstrated truths, where are the undeniable, indubitable facts, which are contradicted by any dogma of the Catholic faith, or any definition which the supreme authority in the church requires us to believe as an infallible expression of the truth? Where is the flaw in the whole structure of the Catholic argument? The advocates of the Catholic cause cannot desire anything more heartily than that the whole subject should be brought to the test of the most stringent logic, and that all the claims of the Catholic Church should be confronted with the whole array of truths that can be demonstrated by philosophy, and of facts that can be established by history or science.