m oment firmr5C4“I o .

I q o ' g

n ihil®bstat.

R EMY L A F O R T ,

Cemar L a’

br or zmz .

lmmimatut.JOHN M . F A R L EY,

A r c/1622911015 of New York.

NEW YO RK,March 2 5 , 1 904.

Copyright, 1904 , by B ENZ IGE R B R O THE RS.

PREFACE .

TH E contents o f this volume appeared originally

in The Catholic Transcript, o f Hartford, Co n n ecti

cut,in weekly instalments , from February, 1901 , to

February, 1903 . During the course of their publica

tion, it became evident that the form o f instruction

adopted was appreciated by a large number of read

ers in varied conditions o f life— this appreciation

being evinced, among other ways , by a frequent and

widespread demand for back-numbers o f the publish

ing journal . The management, finding itself unable

to meet this demand, suggested the bringing out o f

the entire series in book-form ; and thus, with very

few corrections , we offer the Briefs to all desir

ous of a better acquaintance with Catholic Morals .

THE AUTHOR .

CONTENTS .

B elievin g a n d Doin gThe M or a l Agen tCon scien ceLaxity a n d Scr up lesThe L aw of God a n d Its B r ea ch

Sin

H ow to C oun t Sin sCap ita l Sin sP r ideC ovetousn essLustAn gerGlutton yD r in k

E n vySlothWha t W e B elieveWhy W e B elieveW hen ce O u r B elief ' R ea sonWhen ce O u r B elief Gr a ce a n d

H ow W e B elieveF a ith a n d E r r orThe Con sisten t B elieverUn beliefH ow F a ith M a y B e Lost.HopeLove of God

Love o f N elghb o r

P r ayerP etition sR elig ionD evotion s

XXXIII .XXXIV .

XXXV .

XXXV I .XXXVII .XXXVIII .XXXIX .

XL .

XL I .

XLII .XLIII .XLIV.

XL V .

XLVI .XLVI I .XLVIII .XLIX.

L .

L I .

L I I .

LIII .L IV .

L V .

L V I .

L V II .LVI II .L IX.

L X.

L XI .

L XII .LXIII .LXIV .

LXV .

LXVI .LXVII .

L XIX .

L XXI .

CONTENTS .

Ido la tr y a n d Super stitionOccul tismChr istia n Scien ceSwea r in gOathsVowsThe P r ofession a l VowsThe P r ofessionThe R elig iousThe Vow o f P over tyThe Vow o f Obedien ceThe Vow of Cha stityB la sphemyCur sin gP r ofa n ityThe L aw of R est

The D ay of R est

Keep in g the Lor d’s D ay HolyWor ship o f Sa cr ificeWor ship of R est

Servile WorksCommon W orksP a r en ta l D ign ityF ilia l R espectF ilia l LoveAuthor ity a n d Obedien ceShould W e Help O u r Pa r en ts'D isin ter ested Love in P a r en ts

E duca te the Childr enE duca tion a l E xtr avaga n ceGodless E duca tionCa tholic SchoolsSome Weak P oin ts in the Ca tholic School

Sy stem

Cor r ectionJustice a n d R ightsH omicideI s Sucide a SinSel f-Defen seM ur der O ften Sa n ction ed

LXXI I .LXXIII .LXXIV .

LXXV .

L XXVII .LXXVIII .LXXIX.

LXXX.

LXXXI .LXXXI I .LXX'XIII .LXXXIV .

LXXXV .

LXXXVI .L XXXV II .L XXXVIII .LXXXIX.

XC .

XC I .

XC I I .XC I II .XC IV.

XCV .

XCVI .XCV II .XCVII I .XC IX .

CONTENTS .

O n the E thics o f W a r

The M a ssa cr e of the In n ocen tsE nmityO u r E n emies

Immor a lityThe Sin k o f In iquityWher ein Na tur e I s O pposedHea r tsOcca sion sSca n da lNo t Good to B e Alon eA Help in g Han dThou Sha lt N o t Stea lP etty TheftsA n O ft E xp loited , B u t Specious P leaCon tumelyDefama tionD etr a ctionC a lumn y

R a sh Judgmen t

M en da cityC on cea lin g the Tr uth

R estitutionUn doin g the E vilP a yin g B a ckGettin g R id of Ill-Gotten GoodsWha t E xcuses F r om R estitutionD ebts

MO RAL BRIEFS.

CHAPTER I .

BELIEVING AND DOING.

MORALS pertain to right living, to the things Wedo

,in relation to God and His law , as opposed to

right thinking,to What we believe , to dogma . Dogma

directs ou r faith o r belief, morals shape ou r lives . Byfaith we know God, by moral living we serve Him ;and this double homage

,of ou r mind and our works ,

is the worship we owe our Creator and Master andthe necessary condition of our salvation .

Faith alone will save no man . It may be con

ven ien t fo r the easy-going to deny this , and take anopposite View o f the matter ; but convenience is notalways a safe counsellor. It may be that the justman liveth by faith ; but he lives not by faith alone .Or

,if he does , it is faith o f a different sort from

What we define here as faith , viz . ,a firm assent o f the

mind to truths revealed . We have the testimony ofHoly Writ, again and again reiterated , that faith ,even were it capable of moving mountains , withoutgood works is of no avail . The Catholic Church isconvinced that this doctrine is genuine and reliableenough to make it her own and sensible enough , too ,F o r faith does n ot make a man impeccable ; he maybelieve rightly

,and live badly. His knowledge o f

what God expects o f him will not prevent him fromdoing just the contrary ; sin is as easy to a believer asto an unbeliever . And he who pretends to have foundreligion , holiness , the Holy Ghost, o r whatever elsehe may call it, and can therefore no longer prevar i

I0 M ORAL BRIEFS.

cate against the law , is , to common-sense people ,nothing but a sanctified humbug o r a pious idiot.

Nor are good works alone sufficient. Men ofemancipated intelligence and becoming breadth ofmind, are often heard to proclaim with a greaterflourish o f verbosity than of reason and argument,that the golden rule is religion enough for them, without the trappings of creeds and dogmas ; they respectthemselves and respect their neighbors , at least theysay they do

,and this , according to them , is the ful

filmen t of the law . We submit that this sort of worship was in vogue a good many centuries before theGod-Man came down upon earth ; and if it fills thebill now, as it did in those days , it is difficult to seethe utility o f Christ’s coming, of His giving of a lawof belief and of His founding of a Church . It isbeyond human comprehension that He should havecome for naught

,labored for naught and died for

naught . And such must be the case, if the observ

ance of the natural law is a sufficient worship o f theCreator . What reasons Christ may have had for imposing this o r that truth upon ou r belief, is besidethe question ; it is enough that He did reveal truths ,the acceptance o f which glo r ifies Him in the mind ofthe believer, in order that the mere keeping of thecommandments appear forthwith an insufficient modeo f worship .

Besides , morals are based o n dogma, or theyhave no basis at all ; knowledge of the manner o f

serving God can only proceed from knowledge o f whoand what He is ; right living is the fruit of rightthinking . Not that all who believe rightly are righteous and walk in the path of salvation ' losing themselves

,these are lost in spite of the truths they know

and profess ; n o r that they who cling to an erroneousbelief and a false creed can perform no deed of truemoral worth and are doomed ; they may be righteousin Spite o f the errors they profess , thanks alone tothe truths in their creeds that are not wholly co r

BELIEVING A ND DOING. I I

r upted. But the natural order o f things demandsthat our works partake o f the nature of ou r con vic

tions,that truth o r error in mind beget truth o r error

correspondingly in deed and that no amount o f selfconfidence in a man can make a course right when itis wrong

,can make a man’s actions good when they

are materially bad . This is the principle of the treeand its fruit and it is too old-fashioned to be easilydenied . True morals spring from true faith and truedogma ; a false creed cannot teach correct morality,unless accidentally

,as the result of a sprinkling of

truth through the mass o f false teaghin g . The onlyaccredited moral instructor is the true Church . Wherethere is no dogma, there can logically be no morals ,save such as human instinct and reason devise ; butthis is an absurd morality

,since there is no r ecogn i

tion o f an authority, of a legislator, to make the morallaw binding and to give it a sanction . He whosays he is a law unto himself chooses thus to“veil hisproclaiming freedom from all law . His golden ruleis a thing too easily twistable to be of any assured ben~

efit to others than himself ; his moral sense , that ishis sense o f right and wrong, is very likely where hisfaith is— nowhere .It goes without saying that the requirements of

good morals are a heavy burden for the . natural man,

that is , for man left, in the midst o f seductions and allur emen ts, to the purely human resources o f his ownunaided W it and strength ; so heavy a burden is this , infact, that according to Catholic doctrine , it cannot beborne without assistance from o n high

,the which

assmtan ce we call grace . This supernatural aid webelieve essential to the shaping of a good moral life ;for man , being destined , in preference to all the restof animal creation , to a supernatural end , is therebyraised from the natural to a supernatural order . Therequirements o f this order are therefore above andbeyond his native powers and can only be met withthe help o f a force above his own . It is labor lost fo r

I 2 M ORAL BRIEFS.

us to strive to climb the clouds on a ladder o f ou r

own make ; the ladder must be let down from above .Human air-ships are a futile invention and cannot bemade to steer straight o r to soar high in the atmos

pher e o f the sup ernatural . One-half o f those who failin moral matters are those who trust altogether, o r

too much,in their own strength , and reckon without

the power that said Without Me you can do nothmg.

The other half go to the other extreme . They imagine that the Almighty should not only direct and aidthem

,but also that He should come down and drag

them along in spite of themselves ; and they complainwhen He does not, excuse and justify themselves onthe ground that He does n ot, and blame Him fortheir failure to walk straight in the narrow path .

They expect Him to pull them from the clutches o ftemptation into which they have deliberately walked .

The drunkard expects Him to knock the glass out ofhis hand 'the imprudent, the inquisitive and the viciouswould have it so that they might play with fire

,

yea , even put in their hand, and not be scorched o r

burnt. ’Tis a miracle they want,a miracle at every

turn , a suspension o f the laws o f nature to save themfrom the effects o f their voluntary perverseness . To o

lazy to employ the means at their command,they

thrust the whole burden o n the Maker. God helpsthose who help themselves . A supernatural statedoes n ot dispense u s from the obligation of practisingn atural virtue . You can build a supernatural lifeonly on the foundations of a natural life . To do awaywith the latter is to build in the air ; the structure willnot stay up , it will and must come down at the firstblast o f temptation .

Catholic morals therefore require faith in r e

vealed truths , of which they are but deductions ,logical conclusions ; they presuppose, in their observance , the grace o f God ; and call for a certain strenuosity o f life without which nothing meritorious can

THE M ORAL AGENT. 13

be effected . We must be convinced of the right Godhas to trace a line o f conduct for us ; we must be asearnest in enlisting His assistance as if all dependedon Him ; and then go to work as if it all depended onourselves .

CHAPTER II .

THE MORAL AGENT.

MORALS are fo r man, not for the brute ; they areconcerned with his thoughts

,desires

,words and

deeds ; they suppose a moral agent.What is a moral agent 'A mOr al agent is o n e who , in the conduct o f his

life , is capable Of good and evil , and who, In co n se

quen ce o f this faculty Of choosing between right andwrong is responsible to God for the good and evilhe does .Is it enough, in order to qualify as a moral and

responsible agent, to be in a position to respect or toviolate the Law'It is not enough ; but it is necessary that the

agent know what he is doing ; know that it is right o rwrong ; that he will to do it, as such ; and that he befree to do it, or not to do it . Whenever any o n e o f

these three elements— knowledge,consent and liberty

- is wanting in the commission o r omission o f anyact

,the deed is not a moral deed ; and the agent,

under the circumstances,is not a moral agent .

When God created man,He did not make him

simply a being that walks and talks , sleeps andeats

,laughs and cries ; He endowed him with the

faculties o f intelligence and free will . More thanthis

,He inten ded that these faculties should be exer

cised in all the details O f life ; that the intelligenceshould direct

,and the free will approve , every step

14 M ORAL BRIEFS.

taken,every act performed, every deed left undone .

Human energy being thus controlled, all that mandoes is said to be voluntary and bears the peculiarstamp of morality , the quality of being good o r evilin the sight o f God and worthy o f His praise orblame

,according as it squares o r not with the Rule

o f Morality laid down by Him fo r the shaping o f

human life . Of all else He takes no cognizance, sinceall else refers to Him n ot indifferently from the resto f animal creation, and Offers no higher homage thanthat o f instinct and necessity.

When a man in his waking hours does somethingin which his intelligence has no share , does it withoutbeing aware Of what he is doing, he is said to be in astate Of mental aberration , which is only another namefor insanity o r folly, whether it be momentary o r

permanent o f its nature . A human being,in such a

condition,stands o n the same plane with the animal

,

with this difference , that the on e is a freak and theother is not. Morals , good or bad , have no meaningfo r either.If the will o r consent has no part in what is done

,

we do nothing, another acts through us ;’tis not ours

,

but the deed o f another. An instrument o r tool usedin the accomplishment of a purpose possesses thesame negative merit o r demerit, whether it be a thingwithout a will o r an unwilling human being. If weare not free, have no choice in the matter, must consent, we differ in nothing from all brutish and inanimate nature that follows necessarily, fatally, the bento f its instinctive inclinations and obeys the laws o f

its being. Under these conditions,there can be no

morality o r responsibility before God ; ou r deeds arealike blameless and valueless in His sight.Thus , the simple transgression O f the Law does

n ot constitute us in guilt we must transgress deliberately, wilfully. Full inadvertence

,perfect forget

fulness , total blindness is called invincible ignorance ;this destroys utterly the moral act and makes us involuntary agents . When knowledge is incomplete,

THE MORAL AGENT. 1 5

the act is less voluntary ; except it be the case ofignorance brought on purposely, a wilful blinding o f

oneself,in the vain hope o f escaping the consequences

of one’s acts . This betrays a stronger willingness toact

,a more deliberately set will .Concupiscence has a kindred effect o n ou r rea

son.It is a consequence of our fallen nature by

which we are prone to evil rather than to good, findit more to our taste and easier to yield to wrong thanto resist it. Call it passion, temperament, character,what you will, —it is an inclination to evil . We can

n ot always control its action . Everyone has felt moreor less the tyranny o f concupiscence , and no child ofAdam but has it branded in his nature and flesh .

Passioh may rob us of ou r reason , and run into follyo r insanity ; in which event we are unconscious agents ,and do nothing voluntary. It may so Obscure thereason as to make us less ourselves , and consequentlyless willing . But there is such a thing as , with studiedand refined malice and depravity, to purposely andartificially

,as it were , excite concupiscence , in order

the more intensely and savagely to act . This is onlya proof Of greater deliberation, and renders the deedall the more voluntary.

A person is therefore more o r less responsibleaccording as what he does , or the good or evil o f whathe does , is more o r less clear to him . Ignorance o rthe passions may affect his clear vis ion o f right andwrong, and under the stress of this deception, wringa reluctant yielding of the will

,a consent only half

willingly given . Because there is consent, there is guiltbut the guilt is measured by the degree o f premeditation . God looks upon things solely in their relation toHim . An abomination before men may be something very different in His sight who searches theheart and reins of man and measures evil by the

malice o f the evil-doer. The only good o r evil Hesees in our deeds is the good o r evil we ourselves seein them before o r while we act.

16 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Violence and fear may oppress the will, andthereby prove destructive to the morality of an act andthe responsibility O f the agent. Certa in it is , thatwe can be forced to act against our will, to performthat which we abhor

,and do n ot consent to do .

Such force may be brought to bear upon us as wecannot withstand . Fear may influence us in a likemanner. It may paralyze our faculties and rob us o fou r senses . Evidently

,under these conditions , n o

voluntary act is possible,since the will does not con

cur and no consent is given . The subj ect becomesa mere tool in the hands of another.Can violence and fear do more than this' Can

it n ot only rob us o f the power to will,not only force

us to act without consent,but also force the will

,

force us to consent ' Never ; and the simple reasonis that we cannot do two contradictory things atthe same time— consent and not consent

,fo r that is

what it means to be forced to consent . Violence andfear may weaken the will so that it finally yield . Thefault, if fault there be, may be less inexcusable byreason O f the pressure under which it labored . Butonce we have willed, we have willed, and essentially,there is nothing unwilling about what is willinglydone .

The will is an inviolable shrine . Men may circumven t, attack, seduce and weaken it. But it cann ot be forced . The power O f man and devil cannotgo so far. Even God respects it to that point.In all cases o f pressure being brought to bear

upon the moral agent for an evil purpose, when r e

SIStan ce is possible, resistance alone can save himfrom the consequences . He must resist to his utmost

,

to the end , never yield , if he would not incur the r esponsibility o f a free agent . Non-resistan ce betokensp erfect willingness to act. The greater the resistance ,the less voluntary the act in the event of consent being finally given ' for resistance implies reluctance.an d reluctance is the opposition of a will that battles

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

18 M ORAL BRIEFS.

influence the needle points to the star ; so does the willor Law of God control the action o f the conscience ,and direct it faithfully towards what is good .

We have seen that, in order to prevaricate it isnot sufficient to transgress the Law o f God 'we mustknow ; conscience makes us know . It is only whenwe go counter to its dictates that we are constitutedevil-doers. And at the bar o f God’s j ustice , it is o nthe testimony of conscience that sentence will bepassed . Her voice will be that of a witness presentat every deed, good o r evil , o f our lives .Conscience should always tell the truth, and tell

it with certainty. Practically, this is not always thecase . We are sometimes certain that a thing is rightwhen it is really wrong. There are therefore twokinds o f conscience ' a true and a certain conscience,and they are far from being o n e and the same thing .

A true conscience Speaks the truth , that is , tells uswhat is truly right and truly wrong. It is a genn ine echo of the voice of God . A certain conscience

,

whether it speaks the truth o r not, speaks with assurance

,without a suspicion O f error, and its voice

carries conviction . When we act in accordance withthe first, we are right ; we may know it, doubt it o rthink it probable, but we are right in fact. Whenwe Obey the latter, we know , we are sure that weare right, but it is possible that we be in error. A‘

true conscience , therefore , may be certain or un cer

tain ; a certain conscience may be true or erroneous .A true conscience is not the rule of morality.

It must be certain . It is not necessary that it betrue, although this is always to be desired, and inthe normal state o f things should be the case . Buttrue o r false, it must be certain The reason isobvious . God judges us according as we do good orevil . Our merit o r demerit is dependent upon ou r

responsibility. We are responsible only for the goodo r evil we know we do . Knowledge and certaintycome from a certain conscience

,and yet not from

a true conscience which may be doubtful .

CONSCIENCE. 19

Now,suppose we are in error, and think we are

doing something good, whereas it is in reality evil .We perceive no malice in the deed, and, in performing it

,there is consequently no malice in us , we do

n ot sin . The act is said to be materially evil, butformally good ; and for such evil God cannot holdus responsible . Suppose again that we err, and thatthe evil we think we do is really good . In thisinstance

,first

,the law o f morality is violated,— a cer

tain,though erroneous conscience ' this is sinful .

Secondly,a bad motive vitiates an act, even if the

deed in itself be good . Consequently, we incur guiltand God’s wrath by the commission o f such a deed,which is materially good, but formally bad .

One may wonder and say ' “how can guilt at

tach to doing good '” Guilt attaches to formal evil ,that is , evil that is shown to us by our conscienceand committed by us as such . The wrong comes

,

not from the obj ect o f ou r doing which is good,but

from the intention which is bad . It is true thatnothing is good that is not thoroughly good

,that a

thing is bad only when there is something lacking inits goodness , that evil is a defect Of goodness ; butformal evil alone can be imputed to us and materialcannot . The o n e is a conscious , the other an n u

conscious , defect.‘Here an erroneous conscience is

obeyed ; there the same conscience is disregarded .

And that kind Of a conscience is the rule o f morality ;to go against it is to sin .

There are times when we have no certitude . Theconscience may have nothing to say concerning thehonesty o f a cause to which we are about to commitourselves . This state of uncertainty and perplexityis called doubt. To doubt is to suspend judgment ;a dubious conscience is on e that does not function .

In doubt the question may be ' “To do ; is itright o r wrong ' May I perform this act

, o r mustI abstain therefrom '” In this case

,we inquire

whether it be lawful or unlawful to go o n ,but we

30 M ORAL BRIEF S.

are sure that it is lawful n ot to act. There is buton e course to pursue. We must n ot commit ou rselves and must refrain from acting, until such atime

,at least

,as

,by inquiring and considering, we

shall have obtained sufficient evidence to convinceus that we may allow ourselves this liberty withoutincurring guilt . If

, on the contrary, while stilldoubting

,we persist in committing the act, we sin,

because in all affairs o f right and wrong we mustfollow a certain conscience as the standard o f morality.

But the question may be To do o r not todo ; which is right and which is wrong'

” Herewe know not which way to turn, fearing evil ineither alternative . We must do o n e thing or theother . There are reasons and difficulties o n bothsides . We are unable to resolve the difficulties , laythe doubt

,and form a sure conscience , what must

we do 'If all action can be momentarily suspended , and

we have the means o f consulting, we must abstainfrom action and consult. If the affair is urgent, andthis cannot be done ; if we must act o n the spot anddecide for ourselves , then , we can make that dubiousconscience prudently certain by applying this principle to ou r conduct ' “

Of two evils,choose the

lesser.” We therefore judge which action involvesthe least amount of evil . We may embrace the

course thus chosen without a fear o f doing wrong.

If we have inadvertently chosen the greater evil , itis an error of judgment for which we are in nowiseresponsible before God . But this means must beemp loyed only where all other an d surer means fail .The certainty we

__thereby acquire is a prudent certainty, an d is sufficient to guarantee us against O i

fending.

CHAPTER IV

LAXITY AND SCRUPLES .

IN every question o f conscience there are twoopposing factors ' Liberty, which is agreeable to ou r

nature,which allows us to do as we list ; and Law

which binds us unto the observance o f what isunpleasant. Liberty and law are mutually antagonistic .A concession in favor Of one is an infringement uponthe claims Of the other.Conscience , in its normal state , gives to liberty

and to law what to each is legitimately due , n o more ,no less .Truth lies between extremes. At the two Opposite

poles o f conscientious rectitude are laxity andscruples

,one j udging all things lawful

,the other all

things forbidden . O n e inordinately favors liberty,the other the law . And neither has sufficient groundson which to form a sound judgment.They are counterfeit consciences , the o n e dis

honest, the other unreasonable . They do unlawfulbusiness ; and because the verdict they render isfounded o n nothing more solid than imaginations ,they are in nowise standards o f morality

,and should

not be considered as such .

The first is sometimes known as a rubber con

science, ou account Of its capacity fo r stretching itself to meet the exigencies O f a like o r a dislike .

Laxity may be the effect o f a simple illusion .

Men Often do wrong unawares . They excuse themselves with the plea ' “I did not know any better

.

”

But we are n ot here examining the acts that can betraced back to self-illusion ; rather the state o f persons who labor under the disability o f seeing wronganywhere , and who walk through the commandmentsof God and the Church with apparent unconcern

.

What must we think o f such people in face of thefact that they n ot only could

,but should know bet

22 M ORAL BRIEFS.

ter ' They are supposed to know their catechism .

Are there not Catholic books and publications o f va

rions sorts ''

What about the Sunday instructionsand sermons ' These are the means and oppo rtu

n ities, and they facilitate the fulfilment of what is inus a bounden duty to nourish ou r souls before theydie of spiritual hunger .

A delicate, effeminate life , spiritual sloth, andcriminal neglect are responsible fo r this kind o f laxity .

This state Of soul is also the inevitable con se

quen ce o f long years passed in sin and neglect o f

prayer . Habit blunts the keen edge of perception .

Evil is disquieting to a novice ; but it does not lookso bad after you have done it a while and get used toit . Crimes thus become ordinary sins

,and ordinary

sins peccadillos .Then again there are people who

,like the Phar

isees o f old,strain out a gnat and swallow a camel .

They educate themselves up to a strict observance ofall things insignificant . They would not forget to saygrace before and after meals

,but would knife the

neighbor’

s character or soil their minds with all filthin ess, without a scruple o r a shadow of remorse .

These are they who walk in the broad way thatleadeth to destruction . In the first place

,their con

science O r the thing that does duty fo r a conscience ,is false and they are responsible for it. Then

,this

sort O f a conscience is n ot habitually certain,and

laxity consists precisely in contemning doubts andpassing over lurking, lingering suspicions as n ot

worthy of notice . Lastly, it has n ot the quality o f

common prudence since the judgment it pronouncesis not supported by plausible reasons . Its characteris dishonesty.

A scruple is a little sharp stone formerly used asa measure of weight. Pharmacists always havescruples . There is nothing so torturing as to walkwith on e o r several o f these p ebbles in the shoe . Spir

LAXITY A ND SCRUPLES. 23

itual scruples serve the same purpose for the con

science . They torture and torment ; they make devotion and prayer impossible , and blind the con

science ; they weaken the mind, exhaust the bodilyforces

,and cause a disease that not infrequently

comes to a climax in despair o r insanity .

A scrupulous conscience is not to be followed asa standard o f right and wrong, because it is n u

reasonable . In its final analysis it is not certain, butdoubtful and improbable

,and is influenced by the most

futile reasons . It is lawful , it is even necessary, torefuse assent to the dictates of such a conscience .To persons thus afflicted the authoritative need of aprudent adviser must serve as a rule until the con

science is cured of its morbid and erratic tendencies .It is not scruples to walk in the fear o f God

,

and avoid sin and the occasions thereof ' that is wisdom ; n o r to frequent the sacraments and be assid

uous in prayer through a deep concern for the welfare O f one’s soul ' that

‘

is piety.

It is n ot scruples to be at a loss to decide whethera thing is wrong o r right ; that is doubt ; nor to sufferkeenly after the commission o f a grievous sin ; thatis remorse .It is not scruples to be g reatly anxious and dis

turbed over past confessions when there is a reasonable cause for it ' that is natural .A scrupulous person is o n e who

,outside these

several contingencies , is continually racked withfears , and persists , against all evidence, in seeing sinwhere there is none , Or magnifies it beyond all proportion where it really is .The first feature— empty and perpetual fears

concerns confessions which are sufficient,according

to all the rules o f prudence ; prayers , which are saidwith overwrought anxiety

,lest a single distraction

creep in and mar them ; and temptations , which areresisted with inordinate contention o f mind, and perplexity lest consent be given .

24 M ORAL BR IEFS.

The other and more desperate feature is pertin acity of judgment. The scrupulous person will askadvice and not believe a word he is told. The moreinformation he gets, the worse he becomes , and headds to his misery by consulting every adviser inSight. He refuses to be put under obedience andseems to have a morbid affection for his very condition .

There is only on e remedy for this evil, and thatremedy is absolute and blind obedience to a prudentdirector. Choose on e, consult him as Often as youdesire , but do not leave him for another. Then sub

mit punctiliously to his direction . His consciencemust be yours , for the time being. And if youshould err in following him

, God will hold him ,and

not you , responsible.

CHAPTER V.

THE LAW OF GOD AND ITS BREACH .

WITHOUT going into any superfious details , weshall call the Law of God an act O f His will by whichHe ordain

’

s what things we may do o r n o t do, andbinds us unto observance under penalty o f His divinedispleasure .The law thus defined pertains to reasonable be

ings alone, and supposes on our part, as we haveseen , knowledge and free will . The rest of creationis blindly submissive under the hand of God, andyields a necessary Obedience . Man alone can Obeyo r disobey ; but in this latter case he renders himselfamenable to God’s justice who

,as his Creator , has

an equal right to command him , and be obeyed .

The Maker first exercised this right when Heput into His creature’s soul a sense o f right andwrong

,which is nothing more than conscience , o r as

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

26 M ORAL BRIEFS.

L aw . It is made known to us by the infallibleChurch through which God speaks .

Akin to these divine laws is the purely ecclesiastical law or law o f the Church . Christ sent forthHis Church clothed with His own and His Father’sauthority .

“As the Father sent me, so I send you .

”

She was to endure, perfect herself and fulfil hermission on earth . To enable her to carry out this divineplan she makes laws , laws purely ecclesiastical , butlaws that have the same binding force as the divinelaws themselves

,since they bear the stamp of divine

authority. God willed the Church to be ; He willedconsequently all the necessary means without whichshe would cease to be . F o r Catholics, therefore, asfar as Obligations are concerned, there is no practicaldifference between God’s law and the law o f HisChurch . Jesus Christ is God . The Church is Hisspouse . TO her the Saviour said '“He that hearethyou , heareth me , and he that despiseth you despisethMe .'

A breach o f the law is a sin . A sin is adeliberate transgression o f the Law o f God . A sinmay be committed in thought

,in desire

,in word

, o r

in deed, and by Omission as well as by commission .

It is well to bear in mind that a thought, as wellas a deed , is an act, may be a human and a moral act,and consequently may be a sin . Human laws may beviolated only in deed ; but God, who is a sealr cher o f

hearts,takes note o f the workings Of the will whence

springs all malice . To desire to break His comman dmen ts is to Offend Him as effectually as to breakthem in deed ; to relish in one

’s mind forbidden fruits,

to meditate and deliberate on evil purposes , is only adegree removed from actual commission O f wrong .

Evil is perpetrated in the will , either by a longing toprevaricate o r by affection for that which is prohibited. If the evil materializes exteriorly, it does not constitute on e in sin anew ,

but only completes the malicealready existing. Men judge their fellows by their

THE LAW OF GOD AND ITS BREACH . 27

works ; God j udges us by our thoughts, by the innerworkings o f the soul , and takes notice o f our exteriordoings only in so far as they are related to the will .Therefore it is that an offense against Him, to be anOffense , need not necessarily be perpetrated in wordo r in deed ; it is sufficient that the will place itself inopposition to the Will Of God , and adhere to what theLaw forbids .

S in is n o t the same as vice . One is an act, theother is a state or inclination to a ct. One is transitory

,the other is permanent. One can exist without

the other . A drunkard is not always drunk, nor isa man a drunkard fo r having once o r twice overindulged .

In only o n e case is vice less evil than sin, andthat is when the inclination remains an unwilling ihclin atio n and does not pass to acts . A man who te

forms after a protracted spree still retains an inclination , a desire for strong drink . He is nowise criminalso long as he resists that tendency .

But practically vice is worse than Sin ,fo r it sup

poses frequent wilful acts o f sin o f which it is thenatural consequence , and leads to many grievous O f

fen ses.

A vice is without sin when one struggles successfully against it after the habit has been retracted . Itmay never be radically destroyed . There may be n uconscious , involuntary lapses under the constantpressure Of a strong inclination

,as in the vice of

cursing, and it remains innocent a s long as it is n otwilfully yielded to and indulged . But to yield to thegratification Of an evil desire o r propensity

,without

constraint, is to doom oneself to the most prolific o fevils and to lie under the curse o f God .

CHAPTER VI .

IF the Almighty had never imposed upon Hiscreatures a Law

,there would be no sin ; we would

be free to do as we please . But the presence O f God’sLaw restrains our liberty, and it is by using, o r ratherabusing

,our freedom , that we come to violate the

Law . It is fo r this reason that Law is said to beopposed to Liberty . Liberty is a word O f manymeanings . Men swear by it and men juggle with it .It is the slogan in both camps o f the world’s warfare .It is in itself man’s noblest inheritance , and yet thereis n o name under the sun in which more crimes arecommitted .

By liberty as opposed to God’s law we do notunderstand the power to do evil as well as good . Thatliberty is the glory o f man, but the exercise Of it, inthe alternative Of evil , is damnable, and deba ses thecreature in the same proportions as the free choice ofgood ennobles him . That liberty the law leavesuntouched . We never lose it ; or rather, we maylose it partially when under physical restraint, buttotally, only when deprived o f our senses . The lawr espects it . It respects it in the highest degree whenin an individual it curtails o r destroys it fo r theprotection O f society.

Liberty may also be the equal right to do goodand evil . There are those who arrogate to themselvessuch liberty . NO man ever possessed it

,the law

annihilated it forever. And although we have usedthe word in this sense

,the fact is that no man has

the right to do evil o r ever will have,so long as God

is God. These people talk much and loudly aboutfreedom— the magic word l— assert with much pompand verbosity the rights o f man , proclaim his

independence , and are given to mu ch like inane vaunting and braggadocio .

We may be free in many things , but where Godis concerned and He commands , we are free only toobey . His will is supreme, and when it is asserted, wepurely and simply have n o choice to do as we list.This privilege is called license , not liberty. We havecertain rights as men , but we have duties , too, ascreatures

,and it ill-becomes us to prate about our

rights , o r the duties o f others towards us, while weignore the Obligations we are under towards othersand our first duty which is to God . Our boastedindependence consists precisely in this ' that we owe toHim n o t only the origin o f ou r nature , but even thevery breath we draw

,and which preserves our being,

for in Him we live, move and have ou r being.

”

The first prerogative o f God towards us isauthority or the right to command. Our first Obligation as well as o ur highest honor as creatures is toobey. And until we understand this sort Of liberty ,we live in a world o f enigmas and know n ot the firstletter o f the alphabet o f creation . We are not freeto sin .

Liberty rightly understood , true liberty of the

children o f God , is the right Of choice within the law ,

the right to embrace what is good and to avoid whatis evil . This policy noman can take from us ; andfar from infringing upon this right

,the law aids it to

a fuller development. A person reading by candlelight would not compla in

'

that his vision was obscuredif an arc light were substituted for the candle . Atraveler who takes notice o f the signposts along hisway telling the direction and distance

,and pointing

out pitfalls and dangers,would n ot consider his rights

contested o r his liberty restricted by these things . Andthe law , as it becomes more clearly known to us ,defines exactly the sphere o f o ur action and showsplain ly where dangers lurk

'

and evil is to be appre

30 M ORAL BR IEFS.

hended. And we gladly avail ourselves o f this in fo rmation that enables us to walk straight and secure .The law becomes a godsend to our liberty

,and

obedience to it, ou r salvation .

He who goes beyond the bounds of true moralliberty, breaks the law O f God and sins . He therebyrefuses to God the obedience which to Him is due .Disobedience involves contempt of authority and ofhim who commands . S in is therefore a n offenseagainst God, and that Offense is proportionate to thedignity Of the person offended .

The sinner, by his act of disobedience , not onlysets at naught the will o f his Maker, but by the sameact, in a greater o r lesser degree , turns away from hisappointed destiny ; and in this he is imitated by nothin g else in creation . Every other created thing obeys .The heavens follow their designated course . Beastsand birds and fish are intent upon on e thing, and thatis to work out the divine plan . Man alone sows disorder and confusion therein . He shows irreverencefor God’s presence and contempt for His friendship ;ingratitude for His goodness and supreme indifferencefor the penalty that follows his sin as surely as theshadow follows its obj ect. SO that, taken all in all ,such a creature might fitly be said to be one partcrimin al and two parts fool . Folly and sin aresynonymous in Holy Writ . The fool saith in hisheart there is no God .

Sin is essentially an offense . But there is a difference o f degree between a slight and an outrage .There are direct offenses against God, such as therefusal to believe in Him o r unbelief to hope in Him,

o r despair, etc . Indirect Offenses attain Him throughthe neighbor o r ourselves .

All duties to neighbor o r self are not equallyimperious and to fa il in them all is not equally evil .Then again

,n ot all sins are committed through pure

malice,that is , with complete knowledge and full con

SIN . 3 1

sent. Ignorance and weakness are factors to be considered in ou r guilt, and detract from the malice o f

our sins . Hence two kinds o f Sin , mortal and venial .These mark the extremes of Offense. One severs

all relation o f friendship , the other chills the existingfriendship . By on e, we incur God

’s infinite hatred, bythe other

,His displeasure . The penalty for o n e is

eternal ; the other can be atoned for by suffering .

It is n ot possible in all cases to tell exactly whatis mortal and what venia l in ou r offenses . There isa clean-cut distinction between the two , but the lineo f demarcation is not always discernible . There are ,however

,certain characteristics which enable us in

the majority o f cases to distinguish on e from theother.

First, the matter must be grievous in fact o r inintention ; that is , there must be a serious breach ofthe law of God o r the law Of conscience. Then, wemust know perfectly well what we are doing and giveit ou r full consent. It must therefore be a graveOffense in all the plenitude o f its malice . Of course

,

to act without sufficient reason, with a well-foundeddoubt as to the malice o f the act, would be to violatethe law o f conscience and would constitute a mortalsin . There is no moral sin without the fulfilment Ofthese conditions . All other offenses are venial .We cannot, Of course , read the soul Of anybody .

If, however, we suppose knowledge and consent, thereare certain sins that are always mortal . Such areblasphemy, luxury, heresy, etc . When these sins aredeliberate , they are always mortal Offenses . Othersare usually mortal , such as a sin a gainst j ustice . Tosteal is a sin against justice . It is frequently amortal sin

,but it may happen that the amount taken

be slight, in which case the Offense ceases to be mortal .Likewise

,certain Sins are usually venial

,but in

certain circumstances a venial sin may take o n suchmalice as to be constitu ted mortal .

3 2 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Our conscience, under God, is the best judge ofour malevolence and consequently o f our gu ilt.

CHAPTER VII .

HOW TO COUNT SINS.

TH E number o f sins a person may commit is wellnigh incalculable , which is only one way of sayingthat the malice o f man has invented innumerablemeans O f Offending the Almighty— a compliment to ouringenuity and the refinement Of ou r natural perversity. It is not always pleasant to know , and fewpeople try very hard to learn, o f what kind and howmany are their daily Offenses . This knowledge re

veals too nakedly ou r wickedness which we prefer toignore . Catholics , however, who believe in the mecessity Of confession Of sins, take a different view o f

the matter . The requirements Of a good confessionare such as can be met only by those who know inwhat things they have sinned and how Often .

There are many different kinds O f sin . It ispossible by a single act to commit more than on e

sin . And a given sin may be repeated any numbero f times .To get the exact number o f ou r misdeeds we

must begin by counting as many sins at least as thereare kinds Of sin . We might say there is an Offensefor every time a commandment or precept is violatedfor sin is a transgression O f the law . But this wouldbe insufficient inasmuch as the law may commando r forbid more than o n e thing.

Let the first commandment serve as an example .It is broken by sins aga inst faith

, o r unbelief, againsthope , o r despair, against charity , against religion , etc .'

All these Offenses are specifically differen t,that is

,are

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

314 M ORAL BRIEFS.

depen ds upon the action of the will. A fellow who

en ters upon the ta sk of slaying his neighbor can killbut once in fact ; but he can commit the sin of murderin his soul once o r a dozen times. It depends o n thewill. Sin is a deliberate transgression, that is, first ofall an act o f the will. If he resolves once to kill andnever retracts till the deed o f blood is done, he sinsbut once . If he disavows his resolution and afterwards resolves anew, he repeats the sin o i murderin his soul as often as he goes through this processof will action . This sincere retraction of a deed iscalled moral interruption and it has the mysteriouspower of multiplying sins .

Not every interruption is a moral o n e. TO put thematter aside fo r a certain while in the h0pe of a betteropportunity, fo r the procur in g o f necessary

“

facilitieso r fo r any other reason, with the unshaken purpose of pursuing the course entered upon , is to suspend action ; but this action is wholly exterior, anddoes n ot affect the will . The act of the will perseveres ,never loses its force , so there is no moral , but only aphysical, interruption . There is no renewal o f consentfor it has never been withdrawn . The o n e moral actgoes on , and but on e sin is committed.

Thus , of two wretches o n the same errand o f

crime, on e may sin but once, while the other is guiltyo f the same Sin a number o f times . But the severalsins last no longer than the on e. Which is the more

guilty'That is a question for God to decide ; He doesthe judging, we do the counting.

This possible multiplication o f sin where a singleact is apparent emphasizes the fact that evil and goodproceed from the will . It is by the will primarily andessentially that we serve or offend God , and, absolutelyspeaking, no exterior deed is necessary for theaccomplishment o f this end .

The exterior deed of sin always supposes anatural preparation of sin— thought, desires , resolu

How To COUNT S INS. 3 5

tion, -which precede o r accompany the deed , andwithout which there would be n o sin . It is sinful onlyinasmuch as it is related to the will, and is the fruitthereof. The interior act constitutes the sin in its being ;the exterior act constitutes it in its completeness .

All of which leads up to the conclusion , o f anature perhaps to surprise some , that to resolve to sinand to commit the sin in deed are not two differentsins

,but on e complete sin, in all the fulness of its

malice . True, the exterior act may give rise toscandal , and from it may devolve upon us Obligationsof justice

,the reparation o f injury done ; true, with

the exterior complement the sin may be more grievous .But there cannot be several sins if there be on e Singleuninterrupted act o f the will .

An evil thing is proposed to your mind ; you enjoythe thought Of doing it, knowing it to be wrong ; youdesire to do it and resolve to do it ; you take the naturalmeans of doing it ; you succeed and consummate theevil— a long drawn out and well prepared deed

,

’tistrue , but only on e sin . The injustices

,the scandal

,the

sins you might commit incidentally, which do notpertain naturally to the deed

,all these are another

matter, and are other kinds o f sins ; but the act itselfstands alone , complete and on e.

But these interior acts o f sin, whether or n ot theyhave reference to external completion

,must be sinful .

The first stage is the suggestion o f the imaginationor simple seeing of the evil in the mind

,which is not

sinful ; the next is the moving o f the sensibility o r thepurely animal pleasure experienced

,in which there is

no evil , either ; fo r we have no sure mastery over thesefaculties . From the imagination and sensibility thetemptation passes before the will fo r consent . If consent is denied , there is no deadly malice O r guilt, n omatter how long the previous effects may havebeen endured . No thought is a sin unless it be fullyconsented to .

CHAPTER VIII .

CAPITAL SINS .

YOU can never cure a disease till you get at theseat o r root of the evil . It will not do to attack theseveral manifestations that appear on the surface

,the

aches and pains and attendant disorders . You mustattack the affected organ, cut out the root o f the evilgrowth, and kill the obnoxious germ . There is noother permanent remedy ; until this is done, all reliefis but temporary.

And if we desire to remove the distemper of sin ,similarly it is necessary to seek out the root o f all Sin .

We can lay our finger on it at once ; it is inordinateself-love .

Ask yourself why you broke this o r that commandment. It is because it forbade you a satisfactionthat you coveted, a satisfaction that your self-loveimperiously demanded ; o r it is because it prescribed anact that cost an effort, and you loved yourself toomuch to make that effort. Examine every failing,little o r great, and you will trace them back to thesame source . If we thought more o f God and less ofourselves we would never sin . The sinner lives forhimself first, and fo r God afterwards .

Strange that such a sacred thing as love , thesource o f all good, may thus , by abuse , become thefountainhead o f all evil ' Perhaps , if it were not sosacred and prolific of good

,its excess would not be so

unholy. But the higher you stand when you tumble .the greater the fall ; so the better a thing is in itself,the more abominable is its abuse . Love directedaright

,towards God first

,is the fulfilment of the Law ;

love misdirected is the very destruction of all law .

CAPITAL SINS . 37

Yet it is n ot wrong to love oneself ; that is thefirst law of nature . One, and on e only being, theMaker

,are we bound to love more than ourselves .

The neighbor is to be loved as ourselves . And if ou rjust interests conflict with his if ou r rights and hisare opposed to each other, there is n o legitimate meansbut we may employ to obta in o r secure what is rightlyours . The evil of self-love lies in its abuse and excess ,in that it goes beyond the limits set by God and nature ,that it puts unj ustly our interests before God’s and theneighbor’s , and that to self it sacrifices them and allthat pertains to them . Self, the

“ego, is the idolbefore which all must bow .

Self-love, on an evil day, in the garden of Eden ,wedded sin, Satan himself officiating under the disguise O f a serpent ; and she gave birth to sevendaughters like unto herself, who in turn became fruitful mothers of iniquity . Haughty Pride

,fir st-born

and queen among her sisters,is inordinate love o f one’s

worth an d excellence , talents and beauty ; sordidAvarice o r Covetousness is excessive love o f riches ;loathsome Lust is the third

,and loves carnal pleasures

without regard for the law ; fiery Anger , a counterpartof pride , is love rej ected but seeking blindly to remedythe loss bestial Gluttony worships the stomach ; greeneyed Envy is hate for wealth and happiness denied ;finally S loth loves bodily ease and comfort to excess .The infamous brood ' These parents of all iniquity arecalled the seven capital sins . They assume the leadership o f evil in the world and are the seven arms o fSatan .

As it becomes their dignity,these vices never

walk alone o r go unattended , and that is the desperatefeature of their malice . Each has a cortege o f passions , a whole train of inferior minions

,that aecom

pany o r follow . Once entrance gained and a freehand given , there is n o telling the result . Once seatedand secure , the passion seeks to satisfy itself ; that isits business . Certain means are required to this end ,

38 M ORAL BRIEFS.

and these means can be procured only by sin ning .

Obstacles Often stand in the way and new Sins furnishsteps to vault over, o r implements to batter themdown . Intricate and difficult conditions frequentlyarise as the result o f self-indulgence , out o f whichthere is no exit but by fresh Sins . Hence the longtrain of crimes led by one capital sin towards the goalo f its satisfaction, an d hence the havoc wrought by itsuntrammeled working in a human soul .This may seem exaggerated to some ; others it

may mislead as to the true nature o f the capital sins ,unless it be clearly put forth in what their malice consists . Capital sins a re not, in the first place, in themselves , sins ; they are vices , passions , inclinations o r

tendencies to sin, and we know that a vice is notnecessarily sinful . Our first parents bequeathed tous as an inheritance these germs of misery and sin .

We are all in a greater o r lesser degree prone toexcess and to desire unlawful pleasures . Yet

,for

all that, we do n ot o f necessity sin . We Sin whenwe yield to these tendencies and do what they suggest.The simple proneness to evil

,devoid o f all wilful

yielding is therefore not wrong. Why' Becausewe cannot help it ; that is a good and sufficient reason.

These passions may lie dormant in our naturewithout soliciting to evil ; they may, at any moment,awake to action with o r without provocation . Thesight of an enemy o r the thought o f a wrong maystir up anger ; pride may be aroused by flattery,applause o r even compliments ; the demon of lust maymake its presence known and felt for a good reason ,for a slight reason

,or for n o reason at all ; gluttony

shows its head at the‘

sight of food o r drink , etc .He who deliberately and without reason arouses

a passion , and thus exposes himself imprudently toan assault of concupiscence , is grievously guilty ; forit is to trifle with a powerful and dangerous enemyand it betokens indifference to the soul’s salvation .

CAPITAL SINS. 9

Suggestions , seductions, allurements follow uponthe awakening o f these passions. When the array of

these forces comes in contact with the will, the struggleis on ; it is called temptation . Warfare is the naturalstate o f man on earth. Without it, the world herebelow would be a paradise, but life would be withoutmerit.

In this unprovoked and righteous battle with sin ,the only evil to be apprehended is the danger o f

yielding. But far from being Sinful , the greater thedanger, the more meritorious the struggle. It mattersn ot what we experience while fighting the enemy.

Imagination and sensation that solicit to yielding,anxiety o f mind and discouragement, to all this thereis no wrong attached, but merit.

Right o r wrong depends on the outcome . Everystruggle ends in victory o r defeat fo r on e party andin temptation there is sin only in defeat. A singlea ct o f the will decides . It matters n ot how long thestruggle lasts ; i f the will does n ot capitulate, there isno sm.

This resistance demands plenty of energy, a soulinured to like combats and an ample provision o f

weapons of defense— faith, hatred o f sin , love of God.

Prayer is essential . Flight is the safest means , butis n ot always possible . Humility an d self-denial arean excellent, even necessary, preparation fo r assuredvictory.

No man need expect to make himself proofagainst temptation . It is not a sign o f weakn ess ; o rif so, it is a weakness common to all men . There isweakness only in defeat

,and cowardice as well . The

gallant and strong are they who fight manfully.

Manful resistance means victory,and victory makes

o n e stronger and invincible,while defeat at every

repetition places victory farther and farther beyondou r reach .

40 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Success requires more than strength, it requireswisdom, the wisdom to single out the particularpassion that predominates in us , to study its a rtificesand by remote preparation to make ourselves secureagainst its assaults . The leader thus exposed and itspower for evil reduced to a minimum, it will becomparatively easy to hold in check all other dependentpassions .

CHAPTER IX .

PRIDE .

EXCELLENCE is a quality that raises a man abovethe common level and distinguishes him among hisfellow—beings. The term is relative . The quality mayexist in any degree o r measure . ’Tis only the fewthat excel eminently ; but anyone may be said to excelwho is , ever so little, superior to others , be they fewo r many. Three kinds o f advantages go to makeup one’s excellence . Nature’s gifts are talent, knowledge , health, strength , and beauty ; fortune endowsus with honor

,wealth , authority ; and virtue, piety ,

honesty are the blessings of grace. To the possessiono f on e o r several o f these advantages excellence isattached .

All good is made to be loved . All gifts directlyo r indirectly from God are good , and if excellence isthe fruit o f these gifts , it is lawful , reasonable , humanto love it and them . But measure is to be observedIn all things . Virtue is righteously equidistant whilevice goes to extremes . It is not, therefore, attachmentand affection for this excellence, but inordinate ,unrea sonable love that is damnable, and constitutes thevice of pride .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

42 M ORAL BRIEFS

o f authority. Therefore it is that from being a venial,

this species o f pride becomes a mortal offense,because

it leads almost infallibly to disobedience and rebellion.

There is a pride, improperly so called, which is inaccordance with all the rules of order

,reason and

honor. It is a sense o f responsibility and dignitywhich every man owes to himself

,and which is

compatible with the most Sincere humility. It is aregard, an esteem for oneself, too great to allow on e

to stoop to anything base or mean . It is submissiveto authority, acknowledges shortcomings , respectsothers and expects to be respected in return . It canpreside with dignity, an d obey with docility. Farfrom being a vice, it is a virtue and is only too rarein this world. It is nobility of soul which betraysitself in self-respect.

Here is the origin, progress and development o fthe vice . We first consider the good that is in us , andthere is good in all o f us

,more or less . This

consideration becomes first exaggerated ; then on e-sidedby reason o f ou r overlooking and ignoring imper fections and shortcomings . Out o f these reflections arisesan apprehension o f excellence or superiority greaterthan we really possess . From the mind this estimatepasses to the heart which embraces it fondly, rejoicesand exults . The conjoint acceptation of this falseappreciation by the mind and heart is the first completestage o f pride— an overwrought esteem of self. Thenext move is to become self-sufficien t, presumptuous .A Spirit o f enterprise asserts itself, wholly out o f

keeping with the means at hand . It is sometimesfoolish

,sometimes insane

,reason being blinded by

error.The vice then seeks to satisfy itself, craves fo r the

esteem o f others , admiration , flattery, applause , andglory. This is vanity, different from conceit only inthis

,that the former is ba sed on something that is ,

o r has been done , while the latter is based on nothing.

PRIDE. 43

Vanity manifested in word is called boasting ; in deedthat is true, vain-glory in deed without foundationof truth, hypocrisy .

But this is n ot substantial enough for ambition,another form of pride . It covets exterior marks o f

appreciation, rank, honor, dignity, authority. It seeksto rise

,by hook o r crook, for the sole reason o f showing

Off and displaying self. Still growing apace, pridebecomes indignant

,irritated, angry if this due

appreciation is not shown to its excellence ; it despisesothers either fo r antipathy or inferiority . It believesits own j udgment infallible and, if in the wrong, willnever acknowledge a mistake o r yield . Finally theproud man becomes so full o f self that obedienceis beneath him , and he no longer respects authorityo f man o r of God . Here we have the Sin o f pride inall the plenitude o f its malice .Pride is often called an honorable vice

,because

its aspirations are lofty, because it supposes strength,and tends directly to elevate man

,rather than to debase

and degrade him , like the other vices . Yet pride iscompatible with every meanness . It lodges in the

heart of the pauper as well as in that o f the prince .There is nothing contemptible that it will not do tosatisfy itself ; and although its prime malice is toOppose God it has every quality to make it as hideousas Satan himself. It goeth before a fall , but it doesnot cease to exist after the fall ; and no matter howdeep down in the mire of iniquity you search , youwill find pride nethermost. Other vices excite one’spity ; pride makes us shudder.

CHAPTER X .

COVETOUSNESS .

WHAT is a miser asked the teacher of herpupils

,and the bright boy spoke up and answered

one who has a greed fo r gold . But he and all the classwere embarrassed as to how this greed fo r goldshould be qualified . The boy at the foot of the classcame to the rescue, and shouted out'misery.

Less wise answers are made every day in ou r

schools . Misery is indeed the lot, if not the vice, ofthe miser . ’Tis true that this is on e of the few vicesthat arrive at permanent advantages , the othersOffering satisfaction that lasts but for a moment, andleaves nothing but bitterness behind . Yet , the morethe miser possesses the more insatiable his greedbecomes

,and the less his enjoyment

,by reason o f the

redoubled efforts he makes to have and to hold.

But the miser is not the only one infected withthe sin o f avarice . His is not an ordinary

,but an

extreme case . He is the incarnation of the evil . Hebelieves in, hopes in , and loves gold above all thingshe prays and sacrifices to it . Gold is his god, andgold will be his reward

,a miserable o n e.

This degree o f the vice is rare ; or , at least, israrely suffered to manifest itself to this extent ; anda lthough scarcely a man can be found to confess tothis failing, because it is universally regarded as mostloathsome and repulsive , still few there are who arenot more or less slaves to cupidity. Pride is the sinof the angels ; lust is the sin of the brute , and avariceis the sin o f man . Scripture calls it the universalevil . We are more pron e to inveigh aga inst it

,and

accuse others of the vice than to admit it in ourselves .

COVETOUSNESS . 45

Sometimes , it is the pot calling the kettle black ;more often it is a clear case o f

“sour grapes .”Disdain

fo r the dollars “that speak,” “the mighty dollars, in

abundance and in superabundance, is rarely genuine.

There are,concerning the passion o f covetousness ,

two notions as common as they are false . It is thoughtthat this vice is peculiar to the rich , and is not to bemet with among the poor. Now, avarice does n ot

necessarily suppose the possession o f wealth , and doesnot consist in the possession , but in the inordinatedesire, o r greed for, o r the lust of, riches . It maybe

,and Is, difficult for o n e to possess much wealth

without setting one’s heart o n it. But it is also truethat this greed may possess o n e who has l ittle o r

nothing. It may be found in unrestrained excessunder the rags o f the pauper and beggar. They whoaspire to, or desire, riches with avidity are covetouswhether they have much, little, o r nothing. Christpromised His kingdom to the poor in spirit, not to thepoor in fact. Spiritual poverty can associate withabundant wealth, j ust as the most depraved cupiditymay exist in poverty.

Another prej udice, favorable to ourselves, is thatonly misers are covetous, because they love moneyfor itself and deprive themselves

,o f the necessaries

o f life to pile it up . But it is not necessary that thediagnosis reveal these a larming symptoms to be sureo f having a real case o f cupidity. They are covetouswho strive after wealth with passion. Variousmotives may arouse this passion

,and although they

may increase the malice , they do not alter the nature ,o f the vice . Some covet wealth for the sake o f

possessing it ; others , to procure pleasures o r to satisfydifferent passions . Avarice it continues to be

,what

ever the motive . Not even prodigality,the lavish

spending of riches , is a token o f the absence o f

cupidity . Rapacity may stand behind extravagance tokeep the supply inexhausted .

46 M ORAL BRIEFS.

It is covetousness to place one’s greatest happinessin the possession o f wealth, o r to consider its lossor privation the greatest of misfortunes ; in otherwords

,to over-rejoice in having and to over-grieve

in not having .

It is covetousness to be so disposed as to acquireriches unjustly rather than suffer poverty.

It is covetousness to hold, o r give begr udgingly,when charity presses her demandsThere is

,in these cases , a degree of malice that

is ordinarily mortal, because the law o f God and o f

nature is not respected.

It is the nature o f this vice to cause unhappinesswhich increases until it becomes positive wretchednessin the miser. Anxiety o f mind is followed byhardening o f the heart ; then injustice in desire andin fact ; blinding o f the conscience, ending in a generalstultification o f man before the god Mammon .

All desires o f riches and comfort are not, therefore ,avarice . One may aspire to, and seek wealth withoutavidity. This ambition is a laudable on e, for it doesn ot exaggerate the value O f the world’s goods , wouldnot resort to injustice , and has not the characteristictenacity o f covetousness . T here is order in this desirefor plenty. It is the great mover o f activity in life ;it is good because it is natural , and honorable becauseo f its motives .

CHAPTER XI.

LUST .

PRIDE resides principally in the min d, an t. thencesways over the entire man avarice proceeds fromthe heart and affections ; lust has its seat in the flesh .

By pride man prevaricating imitates the angel o f whosenature he partakes ; avarice is proper to man as beinga composite of angelic and animal natures ; lust ischaracteristic of the brute pure and simple . Thistrinity o f concupiscence is in direct opposition to theTrinity of God— to the Father, whose authority pridewould destroy ; to the Son , whose voluntary strippingof the divinity and the poverty of whose life avaricescorns and contemns ; to the Holy Ghost, to whom lustis opposed as the flesh is opposed to the spirit . Thisis the mighty trio that takes possession o f the wholebeing o f man , controls his superior and inferiorappetites, and wars on the whole being of God. Andlust is the most ignoble of the three .

Strictly speaking, it is n ot here question o f the

commandments . They prescribe o r forbid acts o f sin— thoughts , words o r deeds ; lust is a passion, a vice o rinclination, a concupiscence . It is not an act. It doesn ot become a sin while it remains in this state of pureinclination . It is inbred in our nature as children o f

Adam . Lust is an appetite like any other appetite,conformable to our human nature

,and can be satisfied

lawfully within the order established by God andnature . But it is vitiated by the corruption o f fallenflesh . This vitiated appetite craves for unlawful andforbidden satisfactions an d pleasures , such as are n otin keeping with the plans of the Creator . Thus the

48 M ORAL BRIEFS.

vitiated appetite becomes inordinate . At one and thsame time, it becomes in ordinate and sinful, thepassion being gratified unduly by a positive act o fsin.

This depraved inclination, as everyone knows,may be in us

,without being o f us , that is , without any

guilt being imputed to us . This occurs in the eventof a violent assault o f passion, in which our will hasno part

,and which consequently does not materialize,

exteriorly o r interiorly, in a human act forbidden bythe laws of morality . Nor is there a transgression ,even when gratified, if reason and faith control theinclination and direct it along the lines laid down bythe divine and natural laws . Outside o f this, allmanners

,shapes and forms o f lust are grievous sms ,

fo r the law admits n o levity of matter. No furtherinvestigation, at the present time , into the essence o fthis vice is necessary.

There is an abominable theory familiar to, andheld by the dissolute , who, not content with spreadingthe contagion of their souls , aim at poisoning the verywells of morality. They reason somewhat after thisfashion ' Human nature is everywhere the same . Heknows others who best knows himself. A mere glanceat themselves reveals the fact that they are chainedfast to earth by their vile appetites , and that to breakthese chains is a task to o heavy for them to undertake.The fact is overlooked that these bonds are of theirown creation , and that every end is beyond reach o f

him who refuses to take the means to that end .

Incapable, too, o f conceiving a sphere o f moralitysuperior to that in which they move

,and without

further investigation o f facts to make their inductiongood , they conclude that all men a re like themselves ;that open profession o f morality is unadulteratedhypocrisy, that a pure man is a living lie . A morewholesale impeachment o f human veracity and amore brutal indignity offered to human nature could

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

5 0 M ORAL BRIEFS.

The gr avity and malice of sin is not to bemeasured by the fancies, opinions , theories o r attitudeo f men. The first and only rule is the will of Godwhich is sufficiently clear to anyone who scans thesacred pages whereon it is manifested . And therea son of His uncompromising hostility to voluptuousness can be found in the intrinsic malice o f the evil .In man, as God created him, the soul is superior to thebody, and of its nature should rule and govern. Lustinverts this order

,and the flesh lords it over the spirit .

The image o f God is defiled, dra‘gged in the mire offilth and corruption, and robbed o f its spiritual nature ,as far as the thing is possible . It becomes corporal ,carnal , animal . And thus the superior soul with itssublime faculties of intelligence and will is made toobey under the tyranny of emancipated flesh, and likethe brute seeks only for things carnal .It is impossible to say to what this vice will not

lead, o r to enumerate the crimes that follow in itswake . The first and most natural consequence is tocreate a distaste and aversion for prayer, piety,devotion, religion and God ; and this is God

’s mostterrible curse o n the vice , for it puts beyond reacho f the unfortunate sinner the only remedy that couldsave him.

But if God’s justice is so rigorous toward thewanton

,His mercy is never so great as toward those

who need it most, who desire it and ask it. The mosttouching episodes in the Gospels are those in whichChrist opened wide the arms o f His charity to sinfulbut repentant creatures , and lifted them out o f theiriniquity. That same charity and power to shrive ,uplift and strengthen resides to-day, in all itsplenitude , in the Church which is the continuation o f

Christ. Where there is a will there is a way. Thewill is the sinner’s the way is in prayer and thesacraments .

CHAPTER XII .

ANGER.

NEVER say, when you are angry, that you aremad ; it makes you appear much worse than you reallyare

,for only dogs get mad . The rabies in a human

being is a most unnatural and ignoble thing . Yetcommon parlance likens anger to it.

It is safe to say that no o n e has yet been bornthat never yielded, more o r less , to the sway o f thispassion . Everybody‘gets angry. The child sulks

,the

little girl calls names and makes faces , the boy fightsand throws stones ; the maiden waxes huffy, spiteful,and won’t speak, and the irascible male fumes , rages ,an d says and does things that become him not in theleast. Even pious folks have their tiffs and tilts . Allflesh is frail

, an d anger has an easy time of it ; n otbecause this passion is so powerful , but because it isinsidious and passes fo r a harmless little thing in itso rdinary disguise . And yet all wrath does not manifestitself thus exteriorly. Still waters are deepest . Animperturbable countenance may mask a very infernoo f wrath and hatred .

To hear us talk, there is no fault in all this , thegreater part o f the time . It is a soothing tonic to ourconscience after a fit o f rage , to lay all the blame ona defect o f character o r a naturally bad temper. Iffault there is , it is anybody

’s but our own . We recallthe fact that patience is a virtue that has its limits

,and

mention things that we solemnly aver would try theenduring powers o f the beatified on their thrones inheaven . Some , at a loss otherwise to account for it,protest that a particular devil got hold o f them andmade resistance impossible .

5 2 M ORAL BRIEFS.

But it was n ot a devil at all . It was a littlevolcano, or better, a little powder magazine hiddenaway somewhere in the heart. The imp Pride had itshead out looking for a caress, when it received a rebuffinstead . Hastily disappearing within, it spat fire rightand left, and the explosion followed, proportionatein energy and destructive power to the quantity o f

pent-up self-love that served as a charge . Once themine is fired, in the confusion and disorder that follow ,

vengeance stalks forth in quest of the miscreant thatdid the wrong.

Anger is the result of hurt pride, o f injured selflove . It is a violent and inordinate commotion o f

the soul that seeks to wreak vengeance for an injurydone . The causes that arouse anger vary infinitelyin reasonableness

,and there are all degrees o f

intensity.

The malice of anger consists wholly in themeasure o f our deliberate yielding to its promptings .Sin, here as elsewhere, supposes an act o f the will ,A crazy man is not responsible for his deeds ; nor isanyone, for more than what he does knowingly.

The first movement or emotion o f irascibility isusually exempt o f all fault ; by this is meant the playo f the passion on the sensitive part of ou r nature , thesharp , sudden fit that is not foreseen and is not withinour control , the first effects o f the rising wrath , suchas the rush o f blood, the trouble and disorder o f theaffections, surexcitation and solicitation to revenge . Aperson used to repelling these assaults may be takenunawares and carried away to a certain extent in thefirst storm o f passion , in this there is nothing sinful .But the same faultlessness could not be ascribed to himwho exercises no restraining power over his failing,and by yielding habitually fosters it and must shoulderthe responsibility of every excess . We incur theburden o f God’s wrath when , through o ur fault,negligence or a positive act o f the will , we suffer this

ANGER. 5 3

passion to steal away ou r reason , blind us to the valueof our actions, and make us deaf to all considerations .No motive can justify such ignoble weakness thatwould lower us to the level o f the madman

.He

dishonors his Maker who throws the reins to hisanimal instincts and allows them to ga110p ahead withhim

, in a mad career o f vengeance and destruction.

Many do not go to this extent of fury , but givevent to their spleen in a more cool an d calculatingmanner. Their temper, for being less fiery, is morebitter. They are choleric rather than bellicose . Theydo not fly to acts but to desires and well-laid plans ofrevenge . If the desire o r deed lead to a violation of

justice o r charity, to scandal o r any notable evilconsequence

,the sin is clearly morta l ; the more so, if

this inward brooding be of long duration , as it betraysa more deep-seated malice .

Are there any motives capable o f justifying theseoutbursts o f passion ' None at all, if ou r ire has thesetwo features o f unreasonableness and vindictiveness .This is evil . No motive , however good , can j ustifyan evil end .

If any cause were plausible, it would be a graveinjury

,malicious and unjust. But n ot even this is

sufficient, for we are forbidden to return evil fo r evil .It may cause u s grief and pain , but should not inciteus to anger

,hatred and revenge . What poor excuses

would therefore be accidentalor slight injuries , justpenalties for our wrongdoin gs and imaginarygrievances ' The less excusable is ou r wrath , the moreserious is our delinquency. Our guilt is double-dyedwhen the deed and the cause of the deed are both alikeunreasonable .

Yet there is a kind o f anger that is righteous .We speak of the wrath o f God

,and in God there can

be no sin . Christ himself was angry at the sight ofthe vendors in the temple . Holy Writ says ' Be yeangry and sin not. But this passion

,which is the

5 4 M ORAL BRIEFS.

fruit of zeal, has three features which make itimpossible to confound it with the other. It is alwayskept within the bounds o f a wise moderation and underthe empire of reason ; it knows n ot the spirit ofrevenge ; and it has behind it the best of motives,namely, zeal for the glory o f God. It is aroused at thesight o f excesses , injustices , scandals, frauds ; it seeksto destroy sin, and to correct the sin ner. Itis often n ot only a privilege, but a duty.

It supposes, naturally, judgment, prudence, anddiscretion, and excludes all selfish motives .

Zeal in an inferior and more common degree iscalled indignation, an d is directed against all thingsunworthy, low and deserving o f contempt. It respectspersons, but loathes whatever o f sin o r vice that isin, o r comes from, unworthy beings . It is a virtue,and is the effect o f a high sense o f respectability.

Impatience is n ot anger, but a feeling somewhatakin to it, provoked by untoward events and inevitablehappenings , such as the weather, accidents , etc. Itis void o f all spirit o f revenge . Peevishness is chronicimpatience, due to a disordered nervous system andrequires the services o f a competent physician, beinga physical, not a moral, distemper.

Anger is a weakness and betrays many otherweaknesses ; that is why sensible people never a llowthis passion to sway them . It is the last argumento f a lost cause “You are angry, therefore you arewrong.

”The great misery of it is that hot -tempered

people consider their mouths to be safety-valves , whilethe truth is that the wagging tongue generates bilefaster than the open mouth can give exit to it . St .Liguori presented an irate scold with a bottle, thecontents to be taken by the mouthful and held forfifteen minutes

,each time her lord and master returned

home in his cups . She used it with surprising resultsan d went back for more . The saint told her to go tothe well and draw inexhaustibly until cured .

ANGER.

F o r all others , the remedy is to be found in ameditation o f these words of the Our Father“forgive us ou r trespasses , as we forgive those whotrespass against us .” The Almighty will take us atour word .

CHAPTER XIII .

GLUTTONY.

SELF-PRESERVATION is nature’s first law, and thefirst and essential means o f preserving one’s existenceis the taking o f food and drink sufficient to nourishthe body

,sustain its strength and repair the forces

thereof weakened by labor,fatigue o r illness . God, as

well as nature,obliges us to care fo r ou r bodily health ,

in order that the spirit within may work out on earththe end of its being.

Being purely animal,this necessity is not the

noblest and most elevating characteristic of ou r nature.

No r is it, in its imperious and unrelenting requirements , far removed from a species of tyranny. Akind Providence , however, by lending taste, savor anddelectability to our aliments , makes us find pleasurein what otherwise would be repugnant andinsufferably monotonous .

An appetite is a good and excellent thing. Toeat an d drink with relish and satisfaction is a signof good health , on e of the precious boons of nature .And the tendency to satisfy this appetite

,far from

being sinful , is wholly in keeping with the divine plan,and is necessary for a fulsome benefiting o f the

nourishment we take .

5 6 M ORAL BRIEF S.

On the o ther hand, the digestive organism o fthe body is such a delicate and finely adjusted pieceo f mechanism that any excess is liable to clog itsworkings and put it out o f order. It is made forsufi

’

icien cy alone . Nature never intended man to be aglutton ; and she seldom fails to retaliate and avengeexcesses by pain, disease and death .

This fact coupled with the grossness of the viceo f gluttony makes it happily rare , at least in its mostrepulsive form ; for, be it said, it is here question o f

the excessive use o f ordinary food and drink, and noto f intoxicants to which latter form o f gluttony weshall pay our respects later.

The rich are more liable than the poor to sm bygluttony ; but gluttony is fatal to longevity, and theywho enjoy best life

,desire to live longest. ’Tis true,

physicians claim that a large portion o f diseases aredue to over-eating and over—drinking ; but it must beadmitted that this is through ignorance rather thanmalice. So that this passion can hardly be said to becommonly yielded to , at least to the extent o f grievousoffending.

Naturally,the degree o f excess in eating and

drinking is to be measured according to age ,temperament, condition o f life, etc. The term gluttonyis relative . What would be a sin fo r o n e person mightbe permitted as lawful to another . One man mightstarve on what would constitute a sufficiency fo r morethan on e. Then again, not only the quantity, butthe quality

,time and manner, enter for something in

determining just where excess begins . It is difficulttherefore

,and it is impossible, to lay down a general

rule that will fit all cases .It is evident however

,that he is mortally gu ilty

who is so far buried in the flesh as to make eating anddrinking the sole end o f life, who makes a god o f hisstomach . Nor is it necessary to mention certainunmentionable excesses such as were practiced by the

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

5 8 M ORAL BRIEFS.

great moral principle o f Christian philosophy. Thisphilosophy sought out and found the cause and seato f all evil to be in the flesh . The forces of sin residein the flesh while the powers of righteousnessfaith, reason and will— are in the spirit. Thereal issue o f life is between these forces contendingfor supremacy. The spirit should rule ; that is theorder o f ou r being. But the flesh revolts, and byensnaring the will endeavors to dominate over thespirit .

Now it stands to reason that the only way forthe superior part to succeed is to weaken the inferiorpar t. Just as prayer and the gra ce o f the sacramentsfortify the soul, so do food and drink nourish the

animal ; and if the latter is cared fo r to the detrimento f the soul , it waxes strong and formidable andbecomes a menace .The only resource for the soul is then to cut off

the supply that benefits the flesh, a nd strengthen

herself thereby. She acts like a wise engineer whokeeps the explosive and dangerous force of hislocomotive within the limit by reducing the quantityof food he throws into its stomach. Thus the passionsbeing weakened become docile

,and are easily held

under sway by the power that is destined to govern ,and sin is thus rendered morally impossible .It is gluttony that furnishes the passion o f the

flesh with fuel by feeding the an imal too well ; andherein lies the great danger and malice o f this vice .The evil of a slight excess may not be great in itself ;but that evil is great in its consequences . Littleover-indulgences imperceptibly

,but none the less

surely,strengthen the flesh against the spirit, and

when the temptation comes the spirit will be overcome.The ruse of the saints was to starve the enemy.

CHAPTER XIV.

DRINK.

INTEM PERANCE is the immoderate use of anything,good o r bad ; here the word is used to imply anexcessive use o f alcoholic beverages, which excess ,when it reaches the dignity o f a habit or vice, makes aman a drunkard . A drunkard who indulges in “highballs” and other beverages o f fancy price and name , iseuphemistically styled a “tippler his brother, a poordevil who swallows vile concoctions o r red “piz en

” iscalled a plain

,ordinary “soak.

” Whatever name wegive to such gluttons

,the evil in both is the same ;

’tisthe evil o f gluttony .

This vice differs from gluttony proper in that itsobject is strong drink, while the latter is an abuse o ffood and nourishment necessary, in regulated quantity,for the sustenance o f the body. But alcohol is notnecessary to sustain life as an habitual beverage ; itmay stimulate , but it does n ot sustain at all. It hasits legitimate uses , like strychnine and other poisonand drugs ; but being a poison , it must be detrimentalto living tissues , when taken frequently, and cannothave been intended by the Creator as a life-givingnourishment. Its habitual use is therefore n ot anecessity. Its abuse has therefore a more far-fetchedmalice .But its use is not sinful

,any more than the use

of any drug, for alcohol , or liquor, is a creature o f

God and is made fo r good purposes . Its use is notevil, whether it does little good, or no good at all. Thefact of its being unnecessary does n ot make it a forhidden fruit . The habit o f stimulants

,like the habit

of tobacco, while it has no title to be called a good

60 M ORAL BRIEFS .

habit, cannot be qualified as an intrinsically bad habit ;it may be tolerated as long as it is kept w ithin thebounds of sane reason and does not give rise to evilconsequences in self o r others . Apart, therefore, fromthe danger of abuse— a real and fatal danger for many

,

especially fo r the young— and from the evil effects thatmay follow even a moderate use

,the habit is like

another ; a temperate man is not, to any appreciabledegree, less righteous than a moderate smoker. Theman who can use and n ot abuse is just as moral as hisbrother who does not use lest he abuse . He must,however, be said to be less virtuous than another whoabstains rather than run the risk o f being even aremote occasion of sin unto the weak.

The intrinsic malice therefore of this habitconsists in the disorder of excess , which is calledintoxication . Intoxication may exist in differentdegrees and stages ; it is the state o f a man who loses ,to any extent, control over his reasoning facultiesthrough the effects o f. alcohol . There is evil and sinthe moment the brain is affected ; when rea son tottersand falls from its throne in the soul, then the crimeis consummated. When a man says and does andthinks what in his sober senses he would not say, do,or think

,that man is drunk, and there is mortal sin

on his soul. It is n ot an easy ma tter to define justwhen intoxication properly begins and sobriety ends ;every man must do that for himself. But he shouldconsider himself well o n the road to guilt when , beingaware that the fumes of liquor were fast becloudinghis mind

,he took another glass that was certain to

still further obscure his reason and paralyze his will .Much has been said and written about the gross

ness of this vice , its baneful effects and consequences ,to which it were useless here to refer. Suffice it tosay there is nothing that besots a man more completelyan d lowers him more ign obly to the level of the brute.

He falls below, fo r the most stupid of brutes , the ass,

DRINK. 61

kn ows when it has enough ; an d the drunkard does not.It requires small wit indeed to understand that thereis n o sin in the catalogue o f crime that a person inthis state is n ot capable o f committing. He will dothings the very brute would blush to do ; and thenhe will say it was on e of the devil’s j okes . The effectso n individuals , families and genera tions , born andunborn, cannot be exaggerated ; and the drunkard isa tempter o f God and the curse o f society.

Temperance is a moderate use of strong drink ;teetotalism is absolute abstention therefrom. A manmay be temperate without being a teetotaler ; allteetotalers are temperate, at least as far as a lcohol isconcerned, although they are sometimes , some o f them,

accused of using temperance as a cloak for muchintemperance o f speech . If this be true— and thereare cranks in all causes— then temperance is itself thegreatest sufferer. Exaggeration is a mistake ; it repelsright-thinking men and never served any purpose . We

believe it has done the cause of teetotalism a world o fharm . But it is poor logic that will identify with soholy a cause the rabid rantings o f a few irresponsiblefools .The cause o f total abstinence is a holy and

righteous cause . It takes its stand against on e o f thegreatest evils , mora l and social , of the day. It seeksto redeem the fallen, and to save the young andinexperienced . Its means are organization and themighty weapon of good example . It attracts thosewho need it and those who do n o t need it ; the former,to save them ; the latter, to help save others . A n d

there is no banner under which Catholic youth couldmore honorably be enrolled than the banner o f totalabstinence . The man who condemn s o r decries sucha cause either does not know what he is attacking orhis mouthings are not worth the attention o f thosewho esteem honesty an d hate hypocrisy . It is notnecessary to be able to practice virtue in order to

62 M ORAL BRIEFS.

esteem its worth . And it does not make a fellowappear any better even to himself to condemn a causethat condemns his faults .

Saloon-keepers are engaged in an enterpri sewhich in itself is lawful ; the same can be said o f thosewho buy and sell poisons and dynamite and fir e-arms .The nature of his merchandise differentiates hisbusiness from all other kinds o f business, and hisresponsibilities are o f the heaviest . It may, and oftendoes , happen tha t this business is criminal ; and in thismatter the civil law may be silent

,but the moral law

is not. For many a on e such a place is an occasiono f sin, often a near occasion . It is not comforting tokneel in prayer to God with the thought in one’s mindthat one is helping many to damnation

,and that the

curses of drunkards’ wives and mothers and childrenare being piled upon one’s head. How far the averageliquor seller is guilty, God only knows ; but a manwith a deep concern for his soul’s salvation, it seems,would not like to take the risk.

CHAPTER XV.

ENVY.

WHEN envy catches a victim she places an evileye in his mind , gives him a cud to chew, and thensends him gadding.

If the mind’s eye feeds upon one’s own excellencefo r one’s own satisfaction , that is pride ; if it feedsupon the neighbor’s good for one

’s own displeasureand unhappiness

,that is envy. It is not alone this dis

pleasure that makes envy , but the reason o f thisdispleasure

,that is

,what the evil eye discerns in the

ENVY. 63

neighbor’s excellence, namely, a. detrimen t, an obstacleto one’s own success . It is n ot necessary that another

’sprosperity really work injury to ou r own ; it issufficient that the evil eye, through its discoloredvision

,perceive a prejudice therein.

“Ah '” says envy,“he is happy, prosperous , esteemed' My chances arespoiled . I am overshadowed . I am nothing, he iseverything. I am nothing because he is everything.

”

Remember that competition, emulation, rivalry arenot necessarily envy . I dread to see my rival succeed .

I am pa ined if he does succeed . But the cause o f thisannoyance and vexation is less his superiority thanmy inferiority. I regret my failure more than hissuccess . There is no evil eye . ’Tis the sting o f defeatthat causes me pain . If I regret this o r that man’selevation because I fear he will abuse his power ; if Ibecome indignant at the success o f an unworthyperson ; I am not envious , because this superiority ofanother does not appear to me to be a prejudice to mystanding. Whatever sin there is , there is no sino f envy .

We may safely assume that a person who wouldbe saddened by the success o f another , would notfail to rej oice at that other’s misfortune . This is agrievous offense against charity, but it is not, properlyspeaking, envy, fo r envy is always sad ; it is rather aneffect o f envy, a natural product thereof and a formof hatred .

This unnatural view of things which we quali fyas the evil eye, is n ot a sin until it reaches the dignityof a sober judgment, for only then does it becomea

.

human act. Envy like pride,anger

,and the other

Vicious inclinations, may and often does crop out inour nature , momentarily , without our incurring guilt,if it is checked before it receives the acquiescence o fthe will , it is void of wrong, an d only serves to remindus that we have a rich fund o f malice in our naturecapable of an abundant yield of iniquity .

64 M ORAL BRIEFS.

After being born in the mind, envy passes to thefeelings where it matures and furnishes that supplyo f misery which characterizes the vice . Another ishappy at ou r expense ; the sensation is a painful on e,yet it-has a diabolical fascination, and we fondle andcaress it. We brood over our affliction to the embittering and souring of our souls . We swallow andregurgitate over and over aga in our dissatisfaction,and are aptly said to chew the cud o f bitterness .

Out o f such soil as this n aturally springs a rankgrowth o f uncharity and injustice in thought anddesire. The mind and heart o f envy are untrammeledby allbonds o f moral law . It may thin k all evil of arival and wish him all evil . He becomes an enemy

,and

finally he is hated . Envy points directly to hatred .

Lastly, envy is“a gadding passion

,it walketh the

street and does not keep home .” It were better to saythat it “talketh .

” There is nothing like language torelieve one’s feelings ; it is quieting and soothing, andenvy has strong feelings . Hence, evil insinuations ,detraction , slander, etc. Justice becomes an emptyword and the seamless robe o f charity is torn to shreds .As an agent o f destruction envy easily holds the palm

,

for it commands the two strong passions of pride andanger, and they do its bidding.

People scarcely ever acknowledge themselvesenvious . It is such a base, unreasonable and unnaturalvice . If we cannot rejoice with the neighbor, why hepained at his felicity ' And what an insanity it is toimagine that in this wide world on e cannot be happywithout prejudicing the happiness o f another' Whata severe shock it would be to the discontented, themorosely sour

,the cynic, and other human owls, to be

told that they are victims o f this green-eyed monster.They would confess to calumny, and hatred ; to envy,never'

Envy can only exist where there is abundantpride . It is a form o f pride , a shape which it fre

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

66 M ORAL BRIEFS.

traced to a great love of one’s comfort and ease.

Either the lazy fellow does nothing at all— and thisis sloth ; o r he abstains from doing what he shoulddo while otherwise busily occupied— and this too, issloth ; or he does it poorly, negligently, half-heartedly

-and this again is sloth . Nature imposes upon usthe law of labor. He who shirks in whole or in partis slothful .Here, in the moral realm, we refer properly to the

difficulty we find in the service of God, in fulfiling ou r

obligations as Christians and Catholics, in avoiding eviland doing good ; in a word, to the discharge of our

spiritual duties . But then all human obligations havea spiritual side, by the fact of their being obligations .Thus , labor is n ot, like attendance at mass , a spiritualnecessity ; but to provide fo r those who are dependentupon us is a moral obligation and to Shirk it would bea sin of sloth .

Not that it is necessary, if we would avoid sin, tohate repose naturally and experience no difficulty o r

repugnance in working out ou r soul’s salva tion. Slothis inbred in our nature . There is no one but wouldrather avoid than meet difficulties . The service of Godis laborious and painful . The kingdom o f God suffersviolence . It has always been true since the time o f ourancestor Adam, that vice is easy, and virtue difficult ;that the flesh is weak, and repugnan ce to effort, naturalbecause o f the burden o f the flesh . So that, in thisgeneral case, sloth is an obstacle to overcome ratherthan a fault of the will . We may abhor exertion, feelthe laziest of mortals ; if we effect our purpose in spiteo f all that, we can do no sin .

Sometimes sloth takes o n an acute formknown asaridity o r barrenn ess in all things that pertain to God .

The most virtuous souls are not always exempt fromthis . It is a dislike, a distaste that amounts almost toa disgust for prayer especially, a repugnance thatthreatens to overwhelm the soul . That is simply an

absence of sensible fervor, a state of affliction and pro

SLOTH. 67

bation that is as pleasing to God as it is painful tous . After all where would the merit be in the serviceof God, if there were no difficulty '

The type o f the spiritually indolent is that fixtureknown as the half-baked Catholic— some people callhim “a poor stick -who is too lazy to meet his obli

gation s with his Maker. He says no prayers , becausehe can’t ; he lies abed Sunday mornings an d lets theothers go to mass— he is too tired and needs rest ;the effort necessary to prepare fo r and to go to con fession is quite beyond him . In fine, religion is altogethertoo exacting, requires too much o f a man .

0

And,as if to remove all doubt as to the purely

spiritual character o f this inactivity, our friend can beseen, without a complaint, struggling every day to earnthe dollar. He will not grumble about rising at fiveto go fishing o r cycling. He will, after his hard day

’swork, sit till twelve at the theatre o r dance till two inthe morning. He will spend his energy in any dircetion save in that which leads to God.

Others expect virtue to be as easy as it is beautiful .Religion should conduce to one’s comfort. They likeincense , but n ot the smell o f brimstone . They would r ema in forever content o n Tabor, but the dark frown ofCalvary is insupportable . Beautiful churches

,artistic

music , eloquent preaching o n interesting topics,that

is their idea o f religion ; that is what they intend religion— their religion— shall be

,and they proceed to cut

out whatever jars their finer feelings . This is fashionable , but it is not Christian 'to do anything fo r Godif it is easy ; and if it is hard ,— well , God does notexpect so much of us .

You will see at a glance that this sort of a thing isfatal to the sense of God in the soul ; it has for itsfirst , direct and immediate effect to weaken little by little the faith until it finally kills it a ltogether. S loth isa microbe . It creeps into the soul , sucks in its substance and causes a spiritual consumption . This is

68 M ORAL BRIE FSJ

neither an acute nor a violent malady, but it consumesthe patient, dries him up , wears him out, till life goesout like a lamp without oil .

CHAPTER XVII .

WHAT WE BELIEVE.

O UR first duty to God, and the first obligationimposed upon us by the First Commandment is Faith,

o r belief in God— we must know Him .

Belief is solely a manner o f knowing. It is on eway of apprehending, o r getting possession of

,a truth .

There a re other ways o f acquiring knowledge ; by thesenses

, fo r instance , seeing, hearing, etc . , and by ourintelligence o r reason . When truth comes to usthrough the senses , it is called experience ; if thereason presents it, it is called science ; if we use thefaculty o f the soul known as faith, it is belief.

You will observe that belief,experience and

science have o n e and the same object, namely, truth .

These differ only in the manner of apprehending truth .

Belief relies on the testimony o f others ; experience,on the testimony of the senses ; science, o n that o f thereason . What I believe

,I get from others ; what I

experience o r understand , I owe to my individual self.I neither believe nor understand that Hartford exists— I see it. I neither understand nor see that Romeexists— I believe it . I neither see nor believe thattwo parallel lines will never meet— I reason it out , Iunderstand it.

Now it is beside the question here to obj ect thatbelief

,or what we believe , may or may n ot be true .

Neither is all that we see,nor all that o u r reason

produces,true . Human experience and human

WHAT WE BELIEVE. 69

reason, like all things human , may err . Her e wesimply remark that truth is the obj ect o f our belief,as it is the obj ect of ou r experience and of understanding. We shall later see that if human belief may err,faith o r divine belief cannot mislead us , cannot befalse .

Neither is it in order here to contend that belief,of its very nature

,is something uncertain , that it is

synonymous o f opinion ; o r if it supposes a judgment,that judgment is “fo rmidolo se,

” liable a t any momentto be changed o r contradicted . The testimony o f thesenses and of reason does not always carry certainconviction . We may o r may n ot be satisfied with theevidence o f human belief. As fo r the divine , o r faith ,it is certain, o r it is n o t at all ; and who would not besatisfied with the guarantee offered by the Word o f

God'And the truths we believe are those revealed by

God, received by us through a doub le agency, thewritten and the oral word , known as Scripture andTradition . Scripture is contained in the two Testaments ; Tradition is found in the bosom, the life o f

the Church of Christ,in the constant and universal

teachings o f that Church .

The Scripture being a dead letter cannot explaino r interpret itself. Yet, since it is applied to the evervarying lives o f men , it needs an explanation and aninterpretation ; it is practically o f no value withoutit. And in order that the truth thus presented beaccepted by men

,it is necessary

, o f prime necessity,that it have the guarantee o f infallibility. This in fallibility the Church of Christ possesses , else His missionwere a fa ilure .This infallibility is to control the vagaries o f

Tradition , for Tradition , of its very nature , tends toexaggeration , as we find in the legends of ancientpeoples . Exaggerated , they destroy themselves , butin the bosom o f God’s Church these truths foreverretain their character unchanged and unchangeable .

70 M ORAL BRIEFS.

If you accept the truth , the whole truth, andnothing but the truth as revealed by God and deliveredto man by the infallible Church from the Bible andTradition, you have what is called ecclesiastical ,Catholic o r true faith . There is no other true faith .

It is even an open question whether there is any faithat all outside of this ; for outside the Church there isn o reasonable foundation for fa ith, and our faith mustbe reasonable .However, granting that such a thing can be , the

faith of him who takes and leaves off the divine Wordis called divine faith . He is supposed to ignore invincibly a portion o f revea led truth , but he acceptswhat he knows . If he knew something and refusedto embrace it, he would have no faith at all . Thesame is true of on e who having once believed, believesno longer. He impeaches the veracity of God, andtherefore cannot further rely on His Word .

Lastly, it matters n ot at all what kind of truths wereceive from God . Truth is truth always and ever.We may not be able to comprehend what is revealedto us

,and little the wonder. Our intelligence is not

infinite,and God’s is . Many things that men tell

us we believe without understanding ; God deservesou r trust more than men . Our incapacity for understanding all that faith teaches us proves one thingthat there ar e limits to our powers , which may besurprising to some, but is nevertheless true.

CHAPTER XVIII.

WHY WE BELIEVE.

BELIEF, we have said, is the acceptan ce of a

truth from another. We do n ot always accept whatothers present to us as truth, fo r the good reasonthat we may have serious doubts as to whether theyspeak the truth o r not. It is for us to decide thequestion o f ou r informant’s intellectual and moraltrustworthiness. If we do believe him, it is becausewe consider his veracity to be beyond question .

The foundation o f our belief is therefore theveracity o f him whose word we take . They tell methat Lincoln was assassinated . Personally, I knownothing about it. But I do know that they who speakof it could know, did know, and could n ot lead usall astray on this point. I accept their evidence ; Ibelieve on their word .

It is on the testimony of God’s word that webelieve in matters that pertain to faith . The idea wehave of God is that He is infinitely perfect, that Heis all-wise and all-good. He cannot, therefore, underpain of destroying His very existence

,be deceived or

deceive us . When , therefore, He speaks , He speaksthe truth and nothing but the truth . It would be avery stultification o f our rea’son to refuse to believeHim , once we admit His existence .

Now , it is not necessary fo r us to inquire into thethings He reveals , o r to endeavor to discover the why,whence and wherefore . It is truth

, we are certain of

it ; what more do we need' It may be a satisfaction tosee and understand these truths

,just as it is to solve

a problem two o r three different ways . But it is notessential , for the result is a lways the same— truth .

72 M ORAL BRIEFS.

But suppose, with my senses and my reason, Icome to a result at variance with the first, suppose thetestimony o f God’s word and that o f my personalobservations conflict, what then ' There is an errorsomewhere. Either God errs or my faculties play mefalse . Which should have the preference of my assent 'The question is answered a s soon as it is put . I canconceive an erring man, but I cannot conceive a falseGod . Nothing human is infallible ; God alone is proofagainst all error. This would not be my first offenseagainst truth .

“Yes , all this is evident. I shall an d do believeeverything that God deigns to reveal

,because He says

it, whether o r not I see o r understand it. But thedifficulty with me is how to know that God did speak,what He said, what He meant. My difficulty is praetical

,not theoretical .And by the same token you have shifted the

question from “Why we believe” to “Whence webelieve you no longer seek the authority o f yourfaith

,but its genesis . You believe what God says ,

because He says it ; you believe He did say it because— the Church says it . You are no longer dealing withthe truth itself, but with the messenger that bringsthe truth to be believed . The message o f the Churchis ' these are God’s words . As for what these wordsstand for, you are not to trust her, but Him . Thefoundation o f divine belief is on e thing ; the motives o fcredibility are another.We should not confound these two things , if we

would have a clear notion o fwhat faith is , and discoverthe numerous counterfeits that are being palmed off

nowadays on a world that desires a convenient, ratherthan a genuine a rticle.The received manner of belief is first to examine

the truths proposed as coming from God, measurethem with the rule of individual reason , of expediency,feeling

,fancy

,and thus to decide upon their merits . If

this proposition suits , it is accepted. If that other is

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

74 M ORAL BRIEFS.

He reveals Himself to me as to an intelligent beingand He expects that I receive His word intelligently.

Were I to abdicate my reason in the acceptance o f Histruths , I would do my Maker as great an injury asmyself. All the rest of creation offers Him an homageo f pure life , of instinct o r feeling ; man alone can ,

andmust, offer a higher, nobler an d more acceptable homage— that o f reason .

My faith is reasonable , and this is the account myreason gives of my faith ' I can accept as true

,without

in the least comprehending, and far from dishonoringmy reason, with a positive and becoming dignity ,

— I

can accept — but I must accept— whatever is confidedto me by an infallible authority, an authority that canneither deceive nor be deceived . There is nothingsupernatural about this statement .

That which is perfect cannot be subj ect to error ,for error is evil and perfection excludes evil . If Godexists He is perfect . Allow one imperfection to enterinto your notion o f God, and you destroy that notion .

When , therefore, God speaks He is an infallibleauthority. This is the philosophy of common sense .

Now I know that God has spoken . The existenceof that historical personage known as Jesus ofNazareth is more firmly established than that ofAlexander or Caesar . Four books relate a part of Hissayings and doings ; and I have infinitely less reasonto question their authenticity than I have to doubt theauthenticity o f Virgil or Shakespeare . No bookever written has been subjected to such a searching,probing test o f malevolent criticism, at all timesbut especially of late years in Germany and France .Great men

,scholars

,geniuses have devoted their lives

to the impossible task of explaining the Gospels away,with the evident result that the position of the latterremains a thousandfold stronger. Unless I rej ect allhuman testimony

, an d reason forbids , I must acceptthem as genuine , at least in substance .

WHENCE OUR BELIEF ' REASON . 7 5

These four books relate how Jesus healedmiraculously the sick, raised the dead to life, led thelife O f the purest, most honest and sagest Of men,claimed to be God, and proved it by rising from thedead Himself. That this man is divine, reason canadmit without being unreasonable, and must admit tobe reasonable ; and revelation has nothing to do withthe matter.

A glaring statement among all others , on e that isreiterated and insisted upon

,is that all men should

Share in the fruit of His life ; an d for this purpose Hefounded a college o f apostles which He ca lled HisChurch

,to teach all that He said and did , to all men,

for all time. The success of His life and missiondepends upon the continuance of His work.

Why did He act thus ' I do not know . Are therereasons for this economy o f salvation ' Therecerta inly are , else it would not have been established .

But we a re not seeking after reasons ; we are gatheringfacts upon which to build an argument, and these factswe take from the authentic life of Christ.

Now we give the Almighty credit for wisdom in

all His plans,the wisdom o f providing His agencies

with the means to reach the end they are destined toattain . To commission a church to teach all menwithout authority, is to condemn it to utter nothingnessfrom the very beginning. To expect men to a ccept thetruths He revealed

,and such truths 'without a guar

antee against error in the infallibility o f the teacher, isto be ignorant o f human nature . And since at no timemust it cease to teach, it must be indefectible . Beingtrue , it must be o n e ; the work Of God, it must be holy ;being provided for all creatures

,it must be Catholic o r

universal ; a n d being the same as Christ founded uponHis Apostles , it must be apostolic“ If it is not all thesethings together, it is n ot the teacher sent by God to

instruct and direct men .

No o n e who seeks with intelligence , singlemindedness and a pure heart

,will fail to find these

6 M ORAL BRIEFS.

attributes and marks o f the true Church o f Christ .Whether, after finding them, o n e will make an act o ffaith , is another question . But that he can give hisassent with the full approval of his reason is absolutelycertain . Once he does so, he has no further use for hisreason . He enters the Church, an edifice illumin eJby the superior light o f revelation and faith . He canleave reason , like a la n tern, at the door .Therein he will learn many other truths that he

never could have found out with reason alone, truthssuperior

,but not contrary, to reason . These truths he

can never repudiate without sinning against reason,first

,because reason brought him to this pass where he

must believe without the immedia te help o f reason.

One o f the first things we shall hear from theChurch speaking on her own authority is that thesewritings , the four relations o f Christ

’s life,are inspired .

However a person could discover and prove this truthto himself is a mystery that will never be solved . Wecannot assume it ; it must be proven . Unless it beproven, the faith based on this assumption is notreasonable ; and proven it can never be , unless we takeit from an authority whose infallibility is proven . Thatis why we say that it is doubtful if non-Catholic faithis faith at all

,because faith must be reasonab le and

fa ith that is based on an assumption is to say the

least doubtfully reason able.

CHAPTER XX .

WHENCE OUR BELIEF ' GRACE AND WILL .

To believe is to assent to a truth on the authorityof God’s word . We must find that the truth proposedis really guaranteed by the authority Of God. In this

WHENCE OUR BELIEF I GRACE AND WILL. 77

process Of mental research, the mind must be satisfied,and the truth found to be in consonance with the

dicta tes Of right reason, or at least, n ot contrarythereto .

But the fact that we can securely give our assentto this truth does not make us believe . Somethingmore than reason enters into an act o f faith.

Faith is n ot something natural , purely human,beginning and ending in the brain, and a productthereof. This is human belief, n ot divine, and isconsequently n o t faith.

We believe that faith is, of itself, as far beyondthe native powers o f a human being as the sense of

feeling is beyond the power Of a stone, o r intelligence,the faculty o f comprehension, is beyond the powerof an animal . In other words , it is supernatural , abovethe natural forces , and requires the power of God togive it existence. “N0 man can come to me, unlessthe Father who has sent Me, draw him .

”

Some have faith, others have it n ot. Where didyou get your faith ' You were n ot born with it, asyou were with the natural , though dormant facultiesof speech , reason, and free will . You received it

through Baptism . You are a product o f nature ;therefore nature should limit your existence . Butfaith aspires to, and obtains , an end that is n ot naturalbut supern atural . It consequently must itself besupernatural , and cannot be acquired without divineassistance.

Unless God revealed, you could n ot know thetruths of religion . Un less He established a courto f final appeal in His Church

,you could not be sure

what He did reveal Or what He meant to say. BecauseOf the peculiar character of these truths and the natureof the certitude we possess

,many would not believe

at all , if God’s grace were not there to help them .

And even though on e could and would believe,there

is no divine belief or faith proper until the soulreceives the faculty from Him who alone can give it.

78 M ORAL BR IEFS.

The reason why many do not believe is notbecause God’s grace is wanting nor because theirminds cannot be satisfied, not because they cannot, butbecause they will n ot.

Faith is a gift o f God, but not that alone ; it is aconviction

,but n ot that a lone. It is a firm assent o f

the will . We are free to believe o r not to believe .“As one may be convinced and not act according

to his conviction , so may one be convinced and notbelieve according to his conviction . The argumentso f religion do not compel anyone to believe, j ust asthe arguments for good conduct do not compel anyoneto obey . Obedience is the consequence o f willing toobey, and faith is the consequence o f willing tobelieve .”

I am not obliged to receive as true any religiousdogma, as I am forced to accept the proposition thattwo and two are four. I believe because I choose tobelieve . My faith is a submission o f the will . The

authority of God is not binding on me physically, formen have refused and still do refuse to submit to Hisauthority and the authority He communicated to HisChurch. And I know that I , to o , can refuse andperhaps more than once have been tempted to refuse,my assent to truths that interfered too painfully withmy interests and passions .Besides , faith is meritorious, and in order to merit

one must do something difli cult and be free to act. Thedifficulty is to believe what we cannot understand

,

through pride o f intelligence, and to bring that stiffdomineering faculty to recognize a superior.The difficulty is to bend the will to the acceptanceof truths , and consequent obligations that gallour self—love and the flesh . The believer musthave humility and self-denial . The grace of Godfollows these virtues into a soul

,and then your act

o f faith is complete .

Herein we discover the great wisdom of Go dwho sets the price Of faith , and of salvation that

WHENCE OUR BELIEF 2 GRACE A ND WILL. 79

depends on it, not on the mind,but on the will ;

n ot on the intelligence alone,but on the heart. To

no man is grace denied . Every man has the will tograsp what is goo d . But though to all He gives awill, all have n ot the same degree of intelligence ; Hedoes n ot endow them equally in this respect. How

then could He make intelligence the first principle o f

salvation and Of faith ' God searches the heart, notthe mind . A modicum O f wit is guaranteed to all toknow that they can safely believe . Be on e ever so

unlettered and ignorant, and dull, faith and heavenare to him as accessible as to the sage , savant and thegenius . For all, the way is the same.

CHAPTER XXI.

HOW WE BELIEVE.

FAITH is the edifice of a Christian life. It is, o fitself, a mere shell , so to Speak, for unless good workssustain and adorn it, it will crumble, and the Almightyin His day will reduce it to ashes ; faith without worksis of no avail . The corner stone o f this edifice is theauthority O f the word of God, while His gratuitousgrace

, ou r intelligence and will furnish the materialfo r build

'

n g. Now , there are three features Of tha tspiritual construction that deserve a moment’sconsideration .

First, the edifice is solid ; our faith must be firm .

NO hesitation , n o wavering, no deliberate doubting,n o suspicion, no take-and-leave. What we believecomes from God, and we have the infallible authorityof the Church fo r it, and of that we must be certain .

Tha t certainly must not for a moment falter, and the

80 M ORAL BRIEFS.

moment it does falter,there is n o telling but that the

whole edifice so laboriously raised will tumble downupon the guilty Shoulders o f the imprudent doubter .

And of reasons for hesitating and disbelievingthere is absolutely none

,once we have made the

venture o f faith and believe sincerely an d reasonably.

N0 human power can in reason impugn revealed truthsfor they are impervious to human intelligence . Onebook may n ot at the same time be three books ; but cano n e divine nature be at o n e and the same time threedivine persons ' Until we learn what divinity andpersonality are we can affirm nothing on the authorityo f pure reason . If we cannot assert, how can we deny '

And if we know nothing about it,how can we do

either ' The question is not how is it, but if it is .While it stands thus

,and thus ever it must stand , no

obj ection o r doubt born of human mind can influenceour belief. Nothing but pride o f mind and corruptiono f heart can disturb it.If you have a difficulty, well , it is a difficulty,

and nothing more . A difficulty does not destroy athesis that is solidly founded . Once a truth is clearlyestablished, not all the difficulties in the world canmake it an untruth. A difficulty as to the truthrevealed argues an imperfect intelligence ; it is idle tocomplain that we are finite . A difficulty regardingthe infallible Church should not make her less infalliblein ou r mind, it simply demands a clearing away.

Theological difliculties should n ot surprise a novice intheological matters ; they are only misunderstandingsthat militate less against the Church than against theerroneous notions we have of her. To allow suchdifl‘iculties to undermine faith is like overthrowinga solid wall with a soap-bubble . Common sensedemands that nothing but clearly demonstrated falsityshould make us change firm convictions

,and such

demonstration can never be made against our faith .

Not from difficulties , properly speaking, but fromour incapacity fo r understanding what we accept as

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XXII.

FAITH AND ERROR.

INTOLERANCE is a harsh term. It is stern,rigid,

brutal, a lmost. It makes no compromise, combats aoutrance and exacts blind and absolute Obedience.Among individuals tolerance should prevail

,man

should be liberal with man, the Law o f Charitydemands it. In regard to principles , there must andshall eternally be antagonism between truth and error,justice demands it. It is a case Of self-preservation ;on e destroys the other. Political truth can nevertolerate treason preached o r practised ; neither can

religious truth tolerate unbelief and heresy preachedo r practised .

Now ou r faith is based o n truth, the Church isthe custodian Of faith, and the Church, o n the platformof religious truth, is absolutely uncompromising andintolerant, j ust as the State is in regard to treason.

She cannot admit error, she cannot approve error ;to do so would be suicidal . She cannot lend theapproval of her presence , nay even of her silence , toerror. She stands aloof from heresy, must alwayssee in it an enemy,

‘

condemns it and cannot helpcondemning it

,fo r she stands for truth , pure and

unal loyed truth, which error pollutes and outrages .Call this what you will , but it is the attitude o f

honesty first,and o f necessity afterwards .

“He whois liberal with what belongs to him is generous,he who undertakes to be generous with what does notbelong to him is dishonest .” Our faith is not foundedon an act or agreement of men , but on the revelationof God . NO human agency can change o r modify it .Neither Church nor Pope can be liberal with the faith

FAITH AND ERROR. 83

Of which they are the custodians. Their sole duty isto guard an d protect it as a precious deposit fo r thesalvation of men.

This is the stand all governments take when thereis question of political truth. And Whatever lack Ofgenerosity o r broadmindedness there be, howevercontrary to the spirit Of this free age it may seem, itis nevertheless the attitude of God Himself who hateserror, for it is evil

,who pursues it with His wrath

through time and through eternity. How can a

custodian Of divine truth act otherwise' Even inhuman affairs

,can one admit that two an d three are

seven '

We sometimes hear it said that this intolerancetakes from Catholics the right to think. This is truein the same sense tha t penitentiaries , o r the dread o f

them , deprive citizens o f the right to act. Everybody,outside of sleeping hours and with his thinking machinein good order, thinks . Perhaps if there were a littlemore o f it, there would be more solid convictionsand more practical faith . Holy Writ has it somewhere that the whole world i s given over to vice and

sin because there is n o on e who thinks .But you have not and never had the right to think

as you please , inside o r outside the Church . Thismeans the right to form false j udgments

, to drawconclusions contrary to fact.

( This is not a right, it isa defect, a disease . Thus to act is not the normalfunction of the brain . It is no more the nature o f themind to generate falsehoods than it is the nature of asewing machine to cut hair. Both were made fo rdifferent things . He therefore who disobeys the lawthat governs his mind prostitu tes that faculty to error .But suppose , being a Catholic , I cannot see things

in that true light, what then' In such a case, eitheryou persist, in the matter of your faith , in being guidedby the smoky lamp o f your reason alone, o r you willbe guided by the authority Of God’s appointed Church .

In the first alternative , your place is not in the Church,

84 M ORAL BRIEFS.

for you exclude yourself by n ot living up to the

conditions of her membership . You cannot deny butthat she has the right to determine those conditions .If you choose the latter, then correct yourself. It

is human to err, but it is stupidity to persist in errorand refuse to be enlightened . If you cannot see foryourself

,common sense demands that you get another

to see for you . You are not supposed to know thealpha and omega of theological science, but you arebound to possess a satisfactory knowledge in orderthat your faith be reasonable .Has no o n e a right to differ from the Church '

Yes , those who err unconsciously, who can do soconscientiously, that is, those who have no suspicionof their being in error . These the heavenly Fatherwill look after an d bring safe to Himself, fo r theirerror is material and n ot formal . He loves them butHe hates their errors . So does the Church abominatethe false doctrines that prevail in the world outside herfold, yet at the same time she has naught butcompassion and pity a nd prayers for those deludedones who spread and receive those errors . To herthe individua l is sacred , but the heresy is damnable.Thus we may mingle with ou r fellow citizens in

business and in pleasure , socially and politically, butreligiously— n ever. Our charity we can Offer in itsfullest measure , but charity tha t lends itself to error,loses its sacred character and becomes the handmaido f evil, fo r error is evil .

CHAPTER XXIII .

THE CONSISTENT BELIEVER.

THE intolerance of the Church towards error, thenatura l position o f One who is the custodian of truth,her only reasonable attitude, makes her forbid herchildren to read, o r listen to, heretical controversy,o r to endeavor to discover religious truth by examiningboth sides o f the question . This places the Catholicin a po sition whereby he must stand aloof from allmanner of doctrinal teaching other than that deliveredby his Church through her accredited ministers. Andwhatever outsiders may think of the correctness o f hisbelief and religious principles

,they cannot have two

Opinions as to the logic and consistency of this standhe takes . They may hurl at him allthe choice epithetsthey choose for being a slave to superstition anderroneous creeds ; but they must give him credit fo rbeing consistent in his belief ; and consistency inreligious matters is too rare a commodity these daysto be made light o f.

The reason o f this stand o f his is that, for him ,

there can be no two Sides to a question which fo r himis settled ; fo r him , there is no seeking after the truthhe possesses it in its fulness , as far as God and religionare concerned . His Church gives him all there is tobe had ; all else is counterfeit. And if he believes , ashe should and does believe

,that revealed truth comes ,

and can come , only by way o f external authority, andnot by way o f private judgment and investigation , hemust refuse to be liberal in the sense o f reading allsorts of Protestant controversial literature and listeningto all kinds of heretical sermons . If he does n o t this ,he is false to his principles ; he contradicts himself

86 M ORAL BRIEFS.

by accepting and not accepting an infallible Church ;he knacks his religious props from un der himself a dstandsw —nowhere . The attitude of the Catholic

,there

fore, is logical and necessary . Holding to Catholicprinciples how can he do otherwise ' How can heconsistently seek after truth when he is convincedthat he holds it ' Who else can teach him religioustruth when he believes that an infallible Church giveshim God’s word and interprets it ‘ in the true andonly sense'

A Protestant may not assume this attitude o r

impose it upon those under his charge . If he does so,he is out of harmony with his principles and deniesthe basic rule o f his belief. A Protestant believesin no infallible authority ; he is an authority untohimself, which authority he does not claim to beinfallible, if he is sober and sane . He is after truth ;and whatever he finds , and wherever he finds it, hesubj ects it to his own private judgment. He is freeto accept o r reject, as he pleases . He is not, cannotbe , absolutely cer tain that what he holds is true ; hethinks it is . He may discover to-day that yesterday

’struths are not truths at all . We are not here examiningthe soundness of this doctrine ; but it does followtherefrom, sound or unsound, that he may consistentlygo where he likes to hear religious doctrine exposedand explained, he may listen to whomever has religiousinformation to impart . He not only may do it , buthe is consistent only when he does . It is his duty toseek after truth

,to read and listen to controversial

books and sermons .If therefore a non-Catholic sincerely believes in

private judgment,how can he consistently act like a

Catholic who stands on a platform diametricallyOpposed to his

,against which platform it is the very

essence of his religion to protest' How can he refuseto hear Catholic preaching and teaching, any morethan Baptist, Methodist and Episcopalian doctrines 'He has no right to do so

,unless he knows all the

r HE CONSISTENT BELIEVER. 87

Catholic Church teaches,which case may be safely

put down as on e in ten million . He may become a

Catholic, o r lose all the faith he has . That is on e of the

risks he has to take , being a Protestant .If he is faithful to his own principles and under

stands the Catholic point of View , he must not besurprised if his Catholic friends do not imitate hisso -called liberality ; they have motives which he hasnot. If he is honest, he will n ot urge o r even expectthem to attend the services o f his particular belief.And a Catholic who thinks that because a Protestantfriend c

’

an accompany him to Catholic services , he tooshould return the compliment and accompany hisfriend to Protestant worship

,has a faith that needs

immediate toning up to the standard of Catholicity ;he is in ignorance o f the first principles of his religionand belief.

A Catholic philosopher resumes this whole matterbriefly, and clearly in two syllogisms , as follows '

(L )

Major. He who believes in an infallible teachero f revelation cannot consistently listen to any fallibleteacher with a view o f getting more correct information than his infallible teacher gives him . T0 do sowould be absurd, for it would be to believe and at thesame time not believe in the infallible teacher.

Minor. The Catholic believes in an infallibleteacher Of revelation .

Conclusion . Therefore,the Catholic cannot

listen to any fallible teacher with a View of gettingmore correct information about revealed truth thanhis Church gives him . To do so would be to stultifyhimself.

(I L )

Major. He who believes in a fall ible teacherprivate judgment o r fallible church— is free

,nay

bound , to listen to any teacher who comes along pro

88 M ORAL BRIEFS.

fessing to have information to impart, for at n o time

can he be cer tain that the findings of his own falliblej udgmen t o r church a re correct. Each n ewcomermay be able to give him further light that may causehim to change his mind .

Minor. The Protestant believes in such fallibleteacher— his private j udgment or church .

Conclusion . Therefore , the Protestant is free tohear, and in perfect harmony with his principles , toaccept the teaching o f any o n e who approaches himfor the purpose of instructing him . He is free to hearwith a clear conscience

,and let his children hear, Cath

olic teaching, fo r the Church claiming infallibility isat its worst as good as his private judgment is at best,namely

,fallible .

Religious variations are so numerous nowadaysthat most people care little what another thinks o r

believes . A ll they ask is that thay may be able toknow at any time where he stands ; and they insist, asright reason imperiously demands , that, in all things ,he remain true to his principles , whatever they be.Honest men respect sincerity and consistency everywhere ; they have nothing but contempt for tho se whostand, now o n o n e foot, now o n the other, who haveon e code for theory and another for practice , whoshift their grounds as Often as convenience suggests .The Catholic should bear this well in mind . There canI no compromise with principles o f truth to sacrificethem for the sake Of convenience is as despicable beforeman as it is Offensive to God.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

90 M ORAL BRIEFS.

in nothing from a formal heretic, and he passes for aheretic. In fact, and before God, he belongs to theChurch , to the soul Of the Church ; he will be saved ifin spite o f his unconscious error he lives well . He isknown as a material heretic .

An infidel is an unbaptized person, whose faith ,even if he does believe in God

,is not supernatural

,

but purely natural . He is an infidel whether he isfound in darkest Africa o r in the midst of thisChristian commonwealth

,and in this latter place there

are more infidels than most people imagine . Adecadent Protestantism rej ects the necessity of

baptism , thereby ceasing to be Christian , and in itstrail infidelity thrives and spreads , disguised ,

’ti'

s true,but nevertheless genuine infidelity. It is baptism thatmakes faith possible , for faith is a gift of God.

An apostate is o n e who, having once believed,ceases to believe . All heretics and infidels are n ot

apostates , although they may be in themselves or intheir ancestors . O n e may apostatize to heresy byrejecting the Church , o r to infidelity by rejecting allrevelation ; a Protestant may thus become anapostate from faith as well as a Catholic . Thisgoing back on the Almighty— for that is what apostasyis

,— is , Of all misfortunes the worst that can befallman . Theremay be excuses, mitigating circumstances,for ou r grea test sins , but here it is useless to seek fo rany. God gives faith . It is lost only through ou r ownfault. God abandons them that abandon Him .

Apostasy is the most patent case of spiritual suicide ,and the apostate carries branded on his forehead themark o f reprobation . A miracle may save him , butnothing short o f a miracle can do it, and who has aright to expect it'God is good, but God is also just.

It is n ot n ecessary to pose as an apostate before thepublic. One may be a renegade at heart withoutbetraying himself

,by refusing his inner assent to a

dogma of faith,by wilfully doubting and allowing

such doubts to grow upon him and form convictions .

UNBELIEF. 91

People sometimes say things that would bran dthem as apostates if they meant what they said . Thiso r that o n e, in the midst Of an orgy of sin , o r afterlong practical irreligion , in order to strangle remorsethat arises at an inopportune moment, may seem toform a judgment of apostasy . This is treading onexceedingly thin glass . But it is not always properlydefection from faith . Apostasy kills faith as surelyas a knife plunged into the heart kills life.

A schismatic does not directly err in matters o ffaith

,but rejects the discipline of the Church and

refuses to submit to her authority. He believes allthat is taught, but puts himself without the pale of theChurch by his insubordination . Schism is a grievoussin, but does not necessarily destroy faith .

The source O f all this unbelief is , o f course , inthe proud mind and sensual heart of man. It takesform exteriorly in an interminable series o f isms”

that have the merit O f appealing to the weaknesses ofman . They all mean the same thing in the end , andare only forms o f paganism . Rationalism and Materialism a re the most frequently used terms . One standson reason alone , the other, on matter, and both havedeclared war to the knife on the Supernatural . Theytell us that these are new brooms destined to sweepclean the universe , new lamps intended to dissipatethe clouds o f ignorance and superstition and to purifywith their light the a tmosphere of the world . But,truth to tell , these brooms have been stirring up dustfrom the gutters o f passion and sin

,and these lamps

Have been offending men’s nostrils by their smokystench ever since man knew himself. And they shallcontinue to do service in the same cause as long ashuman nature remains what it is . But Christ did notbring His faith o n earth to be destroyed by thelilliputian efforts ofman .

CHAPTER XXV.

HOW FAITH MAY BE LOST.

IT is part o f o u r belief that no man can lose hisfaith without mortal sin . The conscious rej ection of allo r an y religious truth once embraced and forming apart Of Christian belief

, o r the deliberate questioningo f a single a rticle thereof, is a sin , a Sin against God

’slight and God’s grace . It is a deliberate turning awayfrom God . The moral culpability o f such an act isgreat in the extreme

,while its consequences cannot be

weighed o r measured by any human norm o r rule .

No faith was ever wrecked in a day ; it takestime to come to such a pass ; it is by easy stages ofinfidelity, by a slow process o f half-denials , a constantfostering o f habits o f ignorance , that o n e undermines ,little by little, one

’s spiritual constitution . Takingadvantage o f this state o f debility, the microbe o f

unbelief creeps in , eats its way to the soul and finallysucks out the very Vita ls o f faith . Nor is this growtho f evil an unconscious one ; and there lies the maliceand guilt. Ignorant pride , neglect of prayer andreligious worship

,disorders

,etc .

,these are evils the

culprit knows O f and wills . He cannot help feelingthe ravages being wrought in his soul ; he cannothelp knowing that these are deadly perils to histreasure o f fa ith . He complacently allows them to runtheir course ; and he wakes up on e fine morning tofind his faith gone , lost, dead— and a chasm yawningbetween him and his God that only a miracle canbridge over.We mentioned ignorance ' this it is that a ttacks

the underpinning of faith , its rational basis , by whichit is made intelligent and reasonable, without whichthere can be no faith .

HOW FAITH M AY BE LOST. 93

Ignorance is , o f course, a relative term ; there aredifferent degrees and different kinds . An ignorantman is not an unlettered o r un cultured on e, but on ewho does n ot know what

‘

his religion mean s, wha t hebelieves o r is supposed to believe, and has no reasonto give fo r his belief. He may know a great manyother things

,may be chock full of worldly learning,

but if he ignores these matters that pertain to the soul ,we shall label him an ignoramus ; for the elementarytruths o f human knowledge are, always have been ,and always shall be , the solution o f the problems o fthe why

,the whence and the whither o f life here below .

Great lea rning frequently goes hand in hand withdense ignorance . The Sunday-school child knowsbetter than the atheist philosopher the answer to theseimportant questions . There is more wisdom in the firstpage Of the Catechism than in all the learned books o fsceptics and infidels.

Knowledge , o f course, a thorough knowledge o f

all theological science will not make faith , any morethan wheels will make a cart. But a certain knowledgeis essential , and its absence is fatal to faith. Thereare the Simple ignorant who have forgotten theirCatechism and leave the church before the instruction,for fear they might learn something ; who never readanything pertaining to religion , who would be ashamedto be detected with a religious book o r paper in theirhands . Then

,there are the learned ignorant

,such as

our public schools turn out in great numbers eachyear ; who, either are above mere religious knowledgeSeeking and disdain all that smacks o f church andfa ith ; o r , knowing little or nothing at all , imagine theypossess a world o f theological lore and know all thatis knowable . These latter are the more to be pitied ,their ignorance doubling back upon itself

,as it were .

When a man does n ot realize his own ignorance, hiscase is well nigh hopeless .If learning cannot give faith

,neither can it alone

preserve it. Learned men,pillars of the Church have

94 M ORAL BRIEFS.

fallen away. Pride, you will say. Yes, Of course,pride is the cause of all evil . But we have all ourshare Of it. If it works less havoc in some thanin others

,that is because pride is o r is not kept within

bounds . It is necessarily fatal to faith only when itis not controlled by prayer and the helps o f practicalreligion . God a lone can preserve our faith . He Willdo it only at our solicitation .

If, therefore, some have not succeeded in keepingthe demon of pride under restraint, it is because theyrefused to consider their faith a pure gift o f God thatcannot be safely guarded without God’s grace ; o r theyforgot that God’s grace is assured to no man who doesn ot pray. The man who thinks he is all-sufficien t untohimself in matters of religion, as in all other matters,is in danger o f being brought to a sense of his ownnothingness in a manner not calculated to be agreeable .N0 man who practised humble prayer ever lost hisfaith, o r ever can ; for to him grace is assured.

And since faith is nothing if not practical, sinceit is a habit, it follows that irreligion, neglect topractise what we believe will destroy that habit. Peoplewho neglect their duty often complain that they haven o taste for religion, cannot get interested, find noconsolation therein . This j ustifies further neglect.They make a pretence to seek the cause . The causeis lack o f faith ; the fires of God’s grace are burninglow in their souls . They will Soon go out unless theyare furnished with fuel in the shape o f good, solid,practical religion. That is their only salvaticn .

Ignorance,supplemented by lack o f prayer and practice,

goes a long way in the destruction o f faith in anysoul , fo r two essentials are deficient.

Disorder, too , is responsible for the loss of much

faith . Luther and Henry might have r etained theirfaith in spite of their pride, but they were lewd, andavaricious ; and there is small indulgence for suchwithin the Church . Not but that we are all human ,and sinners are the Objects Of the Church

’

s greatest

HOW FAITH M AY BE LOST. 9 5

solicitude ; but within her pale no man , be he kingor genius , can sit down and feast his passions an d

expect her to wink at it and call it by another namethan its own . The law o f God and of ti e Churchis a thorn in the flesh of the vicious man . The authorityo f the Church is a sword ofDamocles held perpetuallyover his head— until it is removed . Many a o n e deniesGod in a moment o f sin in order to take the sting o f

remorse out o f it. One gets tired o f the importunitieso f religion that tell us n ot to sin, to confess if we doSin .

When you meet a pervert who, with a glib tongue,protests that his conscience drove him from the

Church, that his enslaved intelligence needed deliverance, search him and you will find a skeleton in hiscloset ; and if you do not find it, it is there just thesame . A r enegade priest some years ago, held forthbefore a gaping audience, at great length, on thereasons o f his leaving the Church . A farmer sittingo n the last bench listened patiently to his profoundargumentation . When the lecturer was in the middleo f his twelfthly, the other a rose and shouted to himacross the hall '“Cut it short, and say you wanted awife .” The heart has reasons which the reason doesnot understand .

Not always , but frequently, ignorance , neglectand vice come to this . The young, the weak and theproud have to guard themselves against these dangers .They work slowly, imperceptibly, but surely. TWO

things increase the peril and tend to precipitatematters ; reading and companionship . The ignorantare Often anxious to know the other side, when theydo not know their own . The consequence is that theywill not understand fully the question ; and if they do,will not be able to resolve the difficulty. They arehandicapped by their ignorance and can only make amess out o f it . The result is that they are caught bysophistries like a fly in a web .

The company of those who believe differently, o r

96 M ORAL BRIEFS.

n ot at all, is also pernicious to unenlightened and weakfaith. The example in itself is potent fo r evil . TheCatholic is u

'

sually not a persona grata as a Catholicbut fo r some quality he possesses . Consequently

,he

must hide his religion under the bushel for fear o f

Offending. Then a sneer, a gibe , a taunt are unpleasantthings , and will be avoided even at the price o f whatat other times would look like being ashamed of one’sfaith. If ignorant, he will be silent ; if he has notprayed, he will be weak ; if vicious, he will bepredisposed to fall .If we would guard the precious deposit of faith

secure against any possible emergency, we mustenlighten it, we must strengthen it, we must live upto it.

CHAPTER XXVI .

HOPE .

THE First Commandment bids us hope as well asbelieve in God . Our trust and confidence in Hismercy to give us eternal life

’

and the means to obtainit

,-this is our hope, founded o n ou r belief that God

is what He reveals Himself to us , able and willing todo by us as we would have Him do. Hope is theflower of our faith ; faith is the substance of the thingswe hope for.TO desire and to hope are not on e and the same

thing. We may long for what is impossible o f

obtaining, while hope always supposes this possibility ,better

,a probability

,nay, even a moral certitude . This

expectation remains hOpe until it comes to the fruitiono f the things hoped fo r .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

98 M ORAL BRIEFS.

of Cain ' My sin is too great that I should expectforgiveness .He who despairs , loses sight of God

’s mercy andsees only His stern, rigorous j ustice . After hatred ofGod, this is perhaps the greatest injury man can doto his Master

,who is Love . There has always been

more of mercy than Of j ustice in His dealings withmen . We might say of Him that He is all mercy inthis world

,to be all j ustice in the next. Therefore

while there is life, there is hOpe.

The next abomination is to hope, but to plac e oursupreme happiness in that which should n ot be theobj ect o f our hope. Men live fo r pleasures , riches ,and honors, as though these things were worthy ofour highest aspirations

,as though they could satisfy

the unappeasable appetite o f man for happiness .Greater folly than this can no man be guilty o f. He

takes the dross for the pure gold,the phantom for the

reality. Few men theoretically belong to this class ;practically it has the vast majority .

The presumptuous are those who hope to Obtainthe prize and do nothing to deserve it. He who wouldhope to fly without wings , to walk without feet, tolive without air or food would be less a fool than hewho hopes to save his soul without fulfilin g theconditions laid down by Him who made us . Thereis no wages without service

,no reward without merit,

n o crown without a cross .This fellow’s mistake is to bank too much on

God’s mercy, leaving His justice out Of the bargainaltogether. Yet God is on e as well as the other, andboth equally . The Offense to God consists in makingHim a being without any backbone , so to speak , a soft,incapable judge, whose pity degenerates into weakness .And certainly it is a serious Offense .

NO , hope should be sensible and reasonable . Itmust keep the middle between two extremes . Themeasure o f ou r hope should reasonably be the measureof our efforts , for he who wishes the end wishes the

HOPE. 99

means . Of course God will make due allowances for.our frailties , but that is His business , not ours ; andwe have no right to say just how far that mercy willgo. Even though we lead the lives O f saints , we shallstand in need of much mercy. Prudence tells us todo all things as though it all depended upon us alone ;then God will make up for the deficiencies .

CHAPTER XXVII .

LOVE OF GOD.

ONCE upon a time,there lived people who

pretended that nothing had existence outside the mind,that obj ects were merely fictions o f the brain ; thus ,when they gave a name to those obj ects , it was likesticking a label in the air where they seemed to be .The world is not without folks who have similar ideasconcerning charity, to whom it is a name withoutsubstance . Scarcely a Christian but will pretend thathe has the virtue o f charity, and o f course on e musttake his word fo r it, and leave his actions and conductout O f

'

all consideration . With him,to love God is

to say you do , whether you really do o r not. Thisis charity o f the “sounding brass and tinkling cymbal”

assortment.TO be honest about it, charity o r love o f God is

nothing more or less , practically, than freedom from,

and avoidance o f, mortal sin .

“If any on e say,‘I love

God’

and hates his brother, (o r otherwise sins ) he is

a liar.” Strong language,but straight to the point'

The state Of grace is the first,fundamental , and

essential condition to the existence o f charity. Cha rity

I 00 M ORAL BR IEFS.

and mortal sin are two things irreducibly opposed,

uncompromisingly antagonistic, eternally inimical.There is no charity where there is sin ; there is noSin where there is charity. That is why charity iscalled the fulfilment Of the law .

On the other hand, it sometimes happens thathumble folks o f the world, striving aga inst temptationand sin to serve the Master

,imagine they can hardly

succeed . True, they rarely Offend and to no greatextent o f malice , but they envy the lot o f others moreadvantageously situated, they think, nearer by talentand state to perfection

,basking in the sunshine o f

God’s love . Ta lent, position, much exterior activity,much supposed goodness

,are , in their eyes, titles to the

kingdom, and infallible signs o f charity. And thenthey foolishly deplore their own state as far removedfrom that perfection

,because forsooth their minds are

uncultured, their faith simple, and their time takenup with the drudgery o f life.They forget that not this gift or that work o r

anything else is necessary . One thing alone isnecessary, an d that is practical love of God . Nothingcounts without it. And the sage over his books , thewonder-worker at his task

,the apostle in his wander

ings and labors,the very martyr o n the rack is no more

sure o f having charity than the most humble man ,woman o r child in the lowest walks o f life who lovesGod too much to offend Him . It is n ot necessary tohave the tongues o f men and angels , o r faith that willmove mountains

, o r the fortitude o f martyrs ; charityexpressed in our lives and deeds rates higher thanthese .

A thing is good in the eyes of its maker if itaccomplishes that for which it was made . A watchthat does n ot tell time, a knife that does not cut,

‘

anda soul that does not love God are three utterly uselessthings . And why'Because they are no good for whatthey were made . The watch exists solely to tell thehour

,the blade to cut and the soul to love and serve

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XXVIII .

LOVE OF NEIGHBOR.

THE precept, written in ou r hearts, as well as inthe law, to love God, commands us , at the same time ,to love the neighbor. When you go to confession, youare told to be sorry for your sins an d to make a firmpurpose o f amendment. These appear to be twodifferent inj unctions ; yet in fact and reality, they areo n e and the same thing, fo r it is impossible to abhorand detest sin , having at the same moment the intentionof committing it. One therefore includes the other ;o n e is not sincere and true without the other ; thereforeone cannot be without the other . So it is with loveo f God and of the neighbor ; these two parts of on e

precept are coupled together because they completeeach other, and they amount practically to the samething.

The neighbor we are to love is n ot alone thosefor whom we naturally have affection, such as parents ,friends , benefactors , etc . , whom it is easy to love. Butour neighbor is all mankind

,those far and those near,

those who have blessed us and those who have wrongedus

,the enemy as well as the friend ; all who have

within them,as we have, the image and likeness o f

God . NO human being can we put outside the pale ofneighborly love .

As fo r the love we bear others , it is of course on ein substance

,but it may be different in degree and

various in quality. It may be more or less tender,intense

,emphatic . Some we love more , others , less ;

yet fo r all that, we love them . It is impossible for usto have towards any other being the same feelingswe entertain for a parent. The love a good Christian

LOVE OF NEIGHBOR. Io3

bears towards a stranger is not the love he bearstowards a good friend . The love therefore that charitydemands admits a variety of shades without losing itscharacter of love .When it comes to loving certain ones of ou r

neighbors,the idea is not Of the most welcome . What'

Must I love,really love, that low rascal, that

cantankerous fellow, that repugnant, repulsive being'Or this other who has wronged me so maliciously'Or that proud

,overbearing creature who looks down

o n me and despises me'We h ave said that love has its degrees, its ebb

an d flow tide, and still remains love . The low watermark is this ' that we refuse n ot to pray for suchneighbors , that we speak not ill o f them, that we refusenot to salute them , o r to do them a good turn, o r toreturn a favor. A breach in on e of these commoncivilities , due to every man from his fellow-man , mayconstitute a degree o f hatred directly opposed to thecharity strictly required of us .It is not however necessary to go on doing these

things all during life and at all moments of life . Theseduties are exterior

,and are required as Often as a

contrary bearing would betoken a lack o f charity inthe heart. Just as we are not called upon to embraceand hug an uninviting person as a neighbor, neithera re we obliged to continue ou r civilities when we findthat they are Offensive and calculated to cause trouble .But naturally there must be charity in the heart.We Should n ot confound uncharity with a sort of

natural repugnance and “antipathy,instinctive to some

natures , betraying a weakness o f character,if you

will , but hardly what one could call a clearly definedfault. There are people who can forgive more easilythan forget and who succeed only after a long whilein overcoming strong feelings . In consequence of thisstate o f mind , and in order to maintain peace andconcord , they prefer the absence to the presence of theObjects o f their antipathy. Of course

,to nourish this

104 M ORAL BRIEFS.

feeling is sinful to a degree ; but while striving againstit, to remove prudently all occasions o f opening afreshthe wound if we act honestly, this does not seemto have any uncharitable malice .

Now all this is not charity unless the idea of Godenter therein . There is no charity outside the idea o fGod . Philanthropy, humanity is o n e thing, charityis another . The o n e is sentiment, the other is lovetwo very different things . The one supposes n aturalmotives

,the other

,supernatural . Philanthropy looks

at the exterior form and discovers a likeness to self.Charity looks at the soul and therein discovers animage of God

,by which we are not only common

children o f Adam,but also children o f God and

sharers o f a common celestial inheritance . Neithera cup o f water nor a fortune given in any other namethan that o f God is charity.

There are certain positive works o f charity, suchas almsgiving and brotherly correction

,etc . , that may

be obligatory upon us to a degree o f serious r espon

sibility. We must use prudence and intelligence indiscerning these obliga tions

,but once they clearly

stand forth they are as binding on us as Obligationso f j ustice . We are our brothers’ keepers , especiallyo f those whom misfortune oppresses and whose lot iscast under a less lucky star.

CHAPTER XXIX.

PRAYER.

No word so common an d familiar amongChristians as prayer. Religion itself is nothing morethan a vast , mighty, universal , never ceasing prayer.Our churches are monuments o f prayer and houses of

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

I o6 M ORAL BRIEFS.

superiority come from his intelligence, and thesequalities , far from attenuating his guilt, only serveto aggravate it.

The brute cats and drinks ; when he is full andtired he throws himself down to rest . When refreshed ,he gets up , shakes himself and goes off again in questo f food and amusement. In what does a man withoutprayer differ from such a being '

But prayer, strictly speaking, means a demand,a petition, an asking. We ask for our needs and ourprincipal needs are pardon and succor. This is prayeras it is generally understood. It is necessary tosalvation . Without it no man can be saved . Ourassurance o f heaven Should be in exact proportion toour asking.

“Ask and you shall receive .” Asknothing, and you obtain nothing ; and that which youdo Il

i ot obtain is j ust what you must have to save yoursou

Here is the explanation o f it in a nutshell . The

doctrine Of the Church is that when God created man,He raised him from a natural to a supernatural state ,and assigned to him a supernatural end . Supernaturalmeans what is above the natural , beyond our naturalpowers o f Obtaining. Our destiny therefore cannot befulfilled without the help of a superior power. Weare utterly incapable by ourselves o f realizing the endto which we are called . The condition absolutelyrequired is the grace o f God and through that alt n ecan we expect to come to our appointed end .

Here is a stone . That that stone should havefeeling is not natural

,but supernatural . God , to give

sensation to that stone,must break through the natu ral

order o f things , because to feel is beyond the nativepowers o f a stone . It is not natural for an animal toreason

,it is impossible . God must work a miracle

to make it understand . Well , the stone is just ascapable o f feeling, and the animal of reasoning, as isman capabie of saving his soul by himself.

PRAYER. 107

To persever e in the state o f grace and thefriendship Of God, to recover it when lost by sin, aresupernatural works . Only by the grace o f God canthis be effected . Will God do this without beingasked ' Say rather will God save us in spite o f

ourselves , o r unknown to ourselves . He who does n otask gives n o token of a desire to obtain .

CHAPTER XXX .

PETITIONS .

F OR all spiritual needs , therefore, prayer is theon e thing necessary . I am in the state o f sin . Idesire to be forgiven . To Obtain pardon is asupernatural act. Alone I can no more do it than fly.

I pray then fo r the grace o f a good confession— Iprudently think myself in the state of grace . WereI fo r a moment left to my depraved nature , to themercy o f my passions , I Should fall into the lowestdepths o f iniquity. The holiest, saintliest o f men arejust as capable of the greatest abominations as theblackest sinner that ever lived . If he does n ot fall ,and the other does

,it is because he prays and the

other does not.Some people have certain spiritual maladies

,that

become second nature to them,called dominant

passions . F o r o n e, it is cursing and swearing ; foranother vanity and conceit. One is afflicted with sloth ,another with uncleanness of o n e kind or another . To

discover the failing is the first duty,to pray against

it is the next . You attack it with prayer as you attacka disease with remedies . And if we only used prayerwith half the care

,perseverance and confidence that

we use medicines, our spiritual distemper would be

short-lived .

108 M ORAL BRIEFS.

A person who passes a considerable time withoutprayer is usually in a bad state of soul . There isprobably no on e, who, upon reflection, will fail todiscover that his best days were those which hisprayers sanctified, and his worst, those which had toget along without any. And when a main starts outbadly, the first thing he takes care to do is to neglecthis prayers . For praying is an antidote and areminder ; it makes him feel uneasy while in sin, andwould make him break with his evil ways ifhe continued to pray . And since he does not wishto st0p , he takes no chances , and gives up his prayers .When he wants to st0p , he falls back o n his prayers .This brings us to the bodily favors we should ask

for. You are sick. You desire to get well , but youdo n ot see the sense Of praying for it ; for you say,“Either I shall get well o r I shall not.” F o r anordinary statement that is as plain and convincing aso n e has a right to expect ; it will stand against allargument. But the conclusion is not Of a piece withthe premises . In that case why do you call in thephysician, why do you take nasty pills andswallow whole quarts of vile concoctions thathave the double merit of bringing distress to yourpalate and your purse ' You take these precautionsbecause your most elementary common sense tells youthat such precautions as medicaments , etc . , enter forsomething of a condition in the decree Of God whichreads that you shall die or n ot die . Your return tohealth o r your shuffling off o f the mortal coil is subjectto conditions of prudence, and according as they arefulfiled o r not fulfiled the decree o f God will go intoeffect one way o r the other.

And why does not your sane common sensesuggest to you that prayer enters as just such acondition in the decrees Of God, that your recovery isjust as conditional on the using Of prayer as to thetaking of pills'Ther e are people who have no faith in drugs,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XXXI .

RELIGION.

'

AS far back as the light of history extends , itshows man

,of every race an d of every clime, occupied

in giving expression, in one way o r another, to hisreligious impressions , sentiments , and convictions . Heknew God ; he was influenced by this knowledgeunto devotion ; and sought to exteriorize this devotionfo r the double purpose Of proving its truth and sin~cer ity, and o f still further nourishing, strengthening ,safeguarding it by means o f an external worship andsensible things . Accordingly, he built temples , erectedaltars , offered sacrifices , burnt incense ; he sang andwept, feasted and fasted he knelt, stood and prostratedhimself— all things in harmony with his hopes andfears . This is worship or cult . We call it religion ,distinct from interior worship o r devotion, but supposing the latter essentia lly. It is commanded by thefirst precept of God .

He who contents himself with a simple ackn owledgmen t of the Divinity in the heart, and confines hispiety to the realm o f the soul, does not fulfil the firstcommandment. The obligation to worship God wasimposed, not upon angels— pure spirits , but uponmen— creatures composed o f a body as well as asoul . The homage that He had a right to expect wastherefore not a purely spiritual o n e, but on e in whichthe body had a part as well as the soul . A man is nota man without a body . Neither can God be satisfiedwith man’s homage unless his physical being cooperate with his spiritual

,unless his piety be translated

into acts and become religion,in the sense in which

we use the word .

RELIGION. I

There is no limit to the different forms religionmay take on a s manifestations of intense fervor andstrong belief. Sounds , attitudes , practices , etc ., areso many vehicles of expression, and may be multipliedindefinitely. They become letters and words andfigures o f a language which, while being conven tionalin a way

,is also natural and imitative, and speaks

more clearly and eloquently and poetically than anyother human language . This is what makes the Catholic religion so beautiful as to compel the admirationOf believers and unbelievers alike .

Of course, there is nothing to prevent an individual from making religion a mask o f hypocrisy. Ifin using these practices, he does not mean what theyimply, he lies as plainly as if he used words withoutregard for their signification. These practices , too,may become absurd, ridiculous and even abominable .When this occurs , it is easily explained by the factthat the mind and heart o f man are never proofagainst imbecility and depravity. There are as manyfools and cranks in the world as there are villains anddegenerates .The Church o f God regulates divine worship for

us with the wisdom and experience o f centuries . Hersacrifice is the first great act o f worship . Then thereare her ceremonies , rites, and Observances ; the use ofholy water, blessed candles , ashes , incense, vestments ;her chants , and fasts and feasts , the symbolism o f hersacraments . This is the language in which

,as a

Church,and in union with her children, she speaks to

God her adoration , praise and thanksgiving. This isher religion, and we practice it by availing ourselvesOf these things and by respecting them as pertainingto God.

We a re sometimes branded as idolaters,that is , as

people who adore another o r others than God. WeOffer our homage of adoration to God who is in heaven ,and to that same God whom we believe to be o n our

I 12 M ORAL BRIEFS.

altars . Looking through Protestant spectacles, we cer

fainly are idolaters , for we adore what they consider assimple bread . In this light we plead guilty ; but isit simple bread' That is the question . The homagewe offer to everything and everybody else is relative

,

that is , it refers to God, and therefore is n o t idolatry.

As to whether o r not we are superstitious in our

practices , that depends on what is the proper homageto Offer God and in what does excess consist. It isn ot a little astonishing to see the no-creed

,dogma

hating, private-judgment sycophants sitting in judgment against us and telling us what is an d what is notcorrect in ou r religious practices . We thought thatsort o f a thing— dogmatism— was excluded fromProtestant ethics ; that every one should be allowedto choose his own mode of worship , that the right andproper way is the way on e thinks right and proper.If the private-interpreter claims this freedom for himself, why not allow it to us ' We thought theyobj ected to this kind of interference in us some fewhundred years ago ; is it too much if we obj ect moststrenuously to it in them in these days ' It is strangehow easily some people forget first principles , andwhat a rare article on the market is consistency.

The persons,places and things that pertain to the

exterior worship of God we are bound to respect, n otfor themselves

,but by reason of the usage for which

they are chosen and set aside, thereby becoming cou secrated

,religious . We should respect them in a spirit

ual way as we respect in a human way all that belongsto those whom we hold dear. Irreverence o r disre

spect is a profanation, a sacrilege .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

I I 4 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Devotions differ in pertaining, not directly, butindirectly through the creature to God . No one butsees at once that devotion, in a certain degree isbinding upon all men a positive want o f it is nothingshort of impiety. But devotions have not the dignityo f entering into the essence o f God-worship . Theyare not constituent parts o f that flower that grows inGod’s garden o f the soul— charity ; they are rather thescent and fragrance that linger around its petals andbetoken its genuine quality. They are o f counsel

,so

to speak, as opposed to the precept o f charity anddevotion . They are outside all commandment

,and

are taken up with a View o f doing something morethan escaping perdition “quasi per ign em.

”

For human nature is rarely satisfied with what isrigorously sufficient . It does n ot relish living per

petually on the ragged edge o f a scant, uncertainmeagerness . People want enough and plenty, abundance and variety. If there are many avenues that leadto God’s throne , they want to use them . If there ar emany outlets for their intense fervor and abundantgenerosity

,they will have them . Devotions answer

these purposes .

Impossible to enumerate all the different practicesthat are in vogue in the Church and go under the nameof devotions . Legion is the number o f saints that havetheir following o f devotees . Some are universal , arepraised and invoked the world over ; others have alocal niche and are all unknown beyond the confineso f a province or nation . Some are invoked in allneeds and distresses ; St . Blase , on the other handis credited with a special power for curing throats , St.Anthony

,for finding lost things

,etc . Honor is paid

them o n account of their proximity to God . TO invokethem is as much an honor to them as an advantageto us .If certain individuals do not like this kind o f a

thin g,they a re under no sort o f an obligation to pr ac

DEVOTIONS. I I 5

tise it. If they can get to heaven without the assistance of the saints, then let them do so, by allmeans ;only let them be sure to get there. No o n e findsdevotions repugnant but those who are ignorant o ftheir real character and meaning. If they are fo rtunate enough to make this discovery, they then, likenearly all converts

,become enthusiastic devotees , find

ing in their devotions new beauties, and new advan

tages every day.

And it is a poor Catholic that leaves devotionsentirely alone, and a rare on e. He may n ot feelinclined to enlist the favor o f this o r that particularsaint, but he usually has a rosary hidden away somewhere in his vest pocke and a scapular around hisneck, or in his pocket, as a last extreme . If he scorn seven this, then the chances are that he is Catholiconly in name, fo r the tree o f faith is such a fertileon e that it rarely fails to yield fruit an d flowers o fexquisite fragrance.

Oh'Of course the lives Of all the saints are nothistory in the strictest sense o f the word . But whathas that to do with the Communion o f Saints' Ifsimplicity and naivete have woven around some n amesan unlikely tale, a fable o r a myth, it requires someeffort to see how that could affect their standing withGod, o r their disposition to help us in ou r needs .

Devotions are n ot based on historical facts ,although in certain facts , events o r happenings , real o ralleged , they may have been furnished with occasionsfor coming into existence .

'

The authenticity of thesefacts is not guaranteed by the doctrinal authority o f

the Church, but she may, and does , approve the devotions that spring therefrom . Independently o f thetruth o f private and individual revelations

,visions and

miracles , which she investigates as to their probability ,she makes sure that there is nothing contrary to thedeposit o f faith and to morals

,and then she gives

these devotions the stamp o f her approval as a

I I6 M ORAL BRIEFS.

security to the faithful who wish to practise them. A“

Catholic or n on -Catholic may think what he likes concerning the apparitions o f the Virgin at Lourdes ; ifhe is dense enough, he may refuse to believe thatmiracles have been performed there . But he cannotdeny that the homage offered to Our Lady at Lourdes

,

and known as devotion to Our Lady o f Lourdes, is inkeeping with religious worship as practised by theChurch and in consonance with reason enlightened bVfaith, and so with all other devotions .

A vase of flowers , a lamp , a burning candlebefore the statue o f a saint is a prayer whose silenceis more eloquent than all the sounds that ever camefrom the lips o f man . It is love that puts it there , lovethat tells it to dispense its sweet perfume or shed itsmellow rays , and love that speaks by this touchingsymbolism to God through a favorite saint.

CHAPTER XXXIII .

IDOLATRY AND SUPERSTITION .

TH E first and greatest sinner against religion isthe idolater

,who offers God-worship to others than

God . There are certain attributes that belong to Godalone

,certain titles that He alone has a right to bear,

certain marks of veneration that are due to Him alone .To ascribe these to any being under God is an abomination , and is called idolatry.

The idols o f paganism have long since beenthrown

,their temples destroyed ; the folly itself has

fallen into disuse,and its extravagances serve only

in history to point a moral o r adorn a tale .

” Yet, intruth

,idolatry is not so dead as all that, if on e would

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 18 M ORAL BRIEFS.

enough to offer only an opinion. But how the royalguesser could be sure enough to swear it, and thatofficially, is what staggers plain people.

Now right reason is a rule by which to judgewhat is and what is not superstitious . But individua lreason or private j udgment and right reason are notsynonyms in the English o r in any other languagethat is human . When reasoning men disagree, rightreason , as far

'

as the debated question is concerned, isproperly said to be off on a vacation, a thing un common ly frequent in human affairs . In order, thereforethat men should not be perpetually at war concerningmatters that pertain to men’s salvation

,God estab

lished a competent authority which even simple folkswith humble minds and pure hearts can find. Indefault o f any adverse claimant the Catholic Churchmust be adjudged that authority. The worship , therefore, that the Church approves as worthy o f God isnot, cannot be, superstition . And what is patentlyagainst reason, o r , in case of doubt, what she reprovesand con demns in religion is superstitious .

Leaving out o f the question for the moment thosespecies of superstition that rise to the dignity ofscience, to the accidental fame and wealth o f humbugsand frauds , the evil embraces a host o f practices thatare usually the result o f a too prevalent psychologicalmalady known as softening of the brain . These poorunfortunates imagine that the Almighty who holds theuniverse in the hollow o f His hand, deals with Hiscreatures in a manner that would make a full-grownman pass as a fool ' if he did the same . Dreams luckpieces , certain combinations o f numbers o r figures ,ordinary o r extraordinary events and happeningsthese are the means whereby God is made to reveal tomen secrets and mysteries as absurd as the meansthemselves . Surely God must have descended fromHis throne o f wisdom.

Strange though it appear, too little religi on— and

IDOLATRY A ND SUPERSTITION . 1 19

not too much— leads to these unholy follies . Thereis a religious instinct in man . True religion satisfiesit fully . 'uack religion , pious tomfoolery, and doctrinal ineptitude foisted upon a God-hungry peopleend by driving some from o n e folly to another in apitiful attempt to get away from the deceptions o f manand near to God. Others are led on by a sinful curiosity that outweighs their common-sense as well as theirrespect for God. These are the guilty ones .It has been said that there is more superstition

that is belief an d dabbling in these inane practicesto -day in on e o f our large cities than the Dark Agesever was afflicted with . If true, it is on e sign o f theworld’s Spiritual unrest, the decay o f unbelief ; andirreligion thus assists at its own disintegration . TheChurch swept the pagan world clean of superstitiononce ; she may soon be called upon to do the workover again.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

OCCULTISM .

SPIRITISM as a theory , a science, a practice, areligion, o r— I might add— a profitable business venture , is considered an evil thing by the Church, andby her is condemned as superstition , that is , as afa lse and unworthy homage to God

,belittling His

maj esty and opposed to the Dispensation of Christ,according to which alone God can be worthilyhonored . This evil has many names ; it includes alldabbling in the supernatural against the sanction of

I 20 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Church authority , and runs a whole gamut of ismsfrom fake trance-mediums to downright diabolicalpossession .

The craft found favor \with the pagans andflourished many years before the Christian era . Won

drous things were wrought by the so -ca lled pythonicspirit ; evidently outside the natural order, still moreevidently not by the agency o f God, and o f a certaintythrough the secret workings of the “Old Boy” himself. It was called Necromancy

, o r the Black Art.It had attractions for the Jews and they yielded tosome extent to the temptation o f consulting thePython' For this reason Moses condemned the evilas an abomination . These are his words

,taken from

Deuteronomy“Neither let there be found among you any o n e

that consulteth soothsayers, o r observeth dreams and

omens ; neither let there be any wizard, nor charmer,nor any on e that consulteth pythonic spirits or fortunetellers , o r that seeketh the truth from the dead . F o r

the Lord abhorreth all these things ; and for theseabominations He will destroy them .

”

The Black Art had its votaries during the M iddleAges and kept the Church busy warriing the faithfulagainst its dangers and its evils . Even so great aname as that o f Albert the Great has been associatedwith the dark doings o f the wizard because, no doubt,o f the marvelous fruits of his genius and deep learning

,which the ignorant believed impossible to mere

human agency. As witchcraft,it flourished during

the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries . The excessesto which it gave rise caused severe laws to be enactedagainst it and stringent measures were taken to suppress it. Many were put to death , sometimes afterthe most cruel tortures . As is usually the case , theinnocent suffered with the guilty . The history of theearly New England settlers makes good reading onthe subject .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

I 22 M ORAL BRIEFS.

to the beck and call o f a creature . In case suchpractices succeed, there is the grave danger o f beingmislead and deceived by the evil spirit, who is oftenpermitted, as the instrument o f God, to punish guiltymen . When resorted to

,as a means of relieving fools

o f their earnings , it is sacrilegious ; and those whosupport such impious humbugs can be excused fromdeadly sin only on the grounds o f lunacy.

Hypnotism and Mesmerism differ from Spiritismin this , that their disciples account for the phenomenanaturally and lay no claim to supernatural in tervention. They produce a sleep in the subj ect, either asthey claim, by the emanation o f a subtile fluid fromthe operator’s body, o r by the influence o f his mindover the mind of the subject. They are agreed o n thispoint, that natural laws could explain the phenomenon,i f these laws were well understood.

With this sort o f a thing, as belonging to thedomain of science and outside her domain

,the Church

has nothing whatever to do . This is a theory uponwhich it behooves men o f science to work ; they aloneare competent in the premises . But without at allencroaching on their domain, the Church claims theright to pronounce upon the morality o f such praetices and to condemn the evils that flow therefrom.

So great are these evils and dangers , when un scru

pulous and ignorant persons take to experimenting,that able and reliable physicians and statesmen haveadvocated the prohibition by law o f all such indiscrimina te practices . Crimes have been committed o n

hypnotized persons and crimes have been committedby them . It is a dangerous power exercised by meno f evil mind and a sure means to their evil ends . Itis likewise detrimental to physical and moral health .

Finally, he who subj ects himself to such influencecommits an immoral act by giving up his will , hisfree agency, into the hands of another . He does thiswillingly

,for n o on e can be hypnotized against his

OCCULTISM . 123

will he does it without reason o r just motive . Thisis an evil

,and to it must be added the responsibility o f

any evil he may be made to commit whilst under thisinfluence . Therefore is the Churchwise in condemningthe indiscriminate practice o f hypnotism o r mesmerism ;and therefore will her children be wise if they leaveit alone . It is n ot superstition, but it is a sin againstman’s individual liberty over which he is constitutedsole guardian , according to the use and abuse of whichhe will on e day be j udged.

CHAPTER XXXV.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

A RECENTLY discovered sin against the FirstCommandment is the worship o f Mrs . Eddy , and itis commonly called Christian Science . Thissacrilegious humbug was conceived in the brain o f

an old woman up in New Hampshire and , like thelittle demon o f error that it is , it leaped forth, after along period o f travail , full-fledged and panoplied, andon its lips were these words ' “What fools thesemortals be '” Dame Eddy gets good returns fromthe sacrilegio-comic tour o f her progeny around thecountry. Intellectual Boston is at her feet , and Bostonpays well fo r its amusements .It is remarkable for an utter lack of anything

like Christianity o r science . It is as Christian asBuddhism an d as scientific as the notions o f ou r earlyforefathers concerning the automobile . It is a parodyon both and like the usual run of parodies , it is asuccess.

124 M ORAL BRIEFS.

The average man Should not attempt to delvedown into the mysterious depths o f mind and matterwhich form the basis o f this system . In the firstplace

,it is an impossible task fo r an ordinary

intelligence ; then , again, it were labor lost, for evenif o n e did get down far enough one could get nothingsatisfactory o ut of it . The force of Eddyism lies inits being mysterious , incomprehensible and contradicto ry . These qualities would kill an ordinar y system ,

but this is no ordinary system . The only way to beatthe Christian Scientist is to invite him to focus all theenergy o f his mind o n a vulgar lamp-post and engravethereon the name of the revered Eddy— this to Showthe power of mind . Then to prove the non-existenceof matter

,ask him to consent to your endeavoring

to make a material impression on his head with animmateria l hammer.

Of course this is not what he meant ; but whathe did mean will become by no means clearer afterthe wearisome

,interminable lengths to which he will

go to elucidate . The fact is that he does not knowit himself, and no o n e can give what he does n ot

possess . True philosophy tells us to define terms an dnever to employ expressions o f more than one meaningwithout saying in what sense we use them . Contemptof this rule is the salvation of Christian Science , andthat is where we lose .

Yet there is something in this fad after all . Totalinsanity is never met with outside state institutions ,and these people are at large . The ravings of adelirious patient are often a monstrous mass of wildabsurdities ; but, if you question the patient whenconvalescent

,you will sometimes be surprised to find

they were all founded on facts which had becomeexaggerated and distorted . There is no such thingas pure unadulterated error . All o f which is meantto convey the idea that at the bottom o f all fraudand falsehood there is some truth , and the malice o f

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

126 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Eddy that does the work. It is God only in the sensethat God is o n e with the patient. Mind is the onlything that exists , and the human mind is on e withthe Mind which is God . Then again this cure insteado f being in opposition to the normal state of thingslike a miracle, itself establishes a normal state , fordisease is abnormal and in contradiction with thenatural state o f man. Mental healing, according tothis system sets the machine going regularly ; miraclesput it out O f order for the moment . Christian Sciencetherefore

,repudiates the healing method O f Jesus by

faith and sets up o n e o f its own , thereby forfeiting alltitle to be called Christian .

Being,therefore , neither Christian nor scientific,

this new cult is nothing but pure nonsense , like allsuperstitions ; the product o f a diseased mind swayedby the demon o f pride, and should be treated principallyas a mental disorder . The chief, and only, merit of thesystem consists in illustrating the truth, as old as theworld, that when men wander from the House wherethey are fed with a celestial nourishment, they willbe glad to eat any food offered them that has asemblance o f food, even though it be but husks andrefuse . Man is a religious animal ; take away thetrue God

,and he will adore anything o r everything,

even to a cucumber. However limited otherwise,there is no limit to his religious folly.

CHAPTER XXXVI .

SWEAR ING.

THOU Shalt not take the name o f the L ord , thyGod in vain.

”

A name is a Sign, and respect fo r God Himself,as prescribed by the First Commandment throughfaith

,hope, charity, prayer and religion, naturally

implies respect for the name that stands for andsignifies God. Your name may, of itself, be nothingmore than mere sound ; but used in relation to whatit represents , it is as sacred, and means as much to

you , as your very person , fo r whatever is addressedto your name , whether o f praise o r blame , is intendedto reach , and does effectively reach, yourself, to yourhonor o r dishonor. You exact therefore of men , asa right, the same respect for your name as for yourperson ; and that is what God does in the SecondCommandment.The name of God represents all that He is . He

who profanes that name profanes a sacred thing, and

is guilty o f what is , in reality, a sacrilege . To useit with respect and piety is an act o f religion whichhonors God. Men use and abuse this holy name , andfirst o f all , by swearing, that is , by taking oaths .

In the early history Of mankind, we are told ,

swearing was unknown . Men were honest, couldtrust each other and take each other’s word . Butwhen duplicity

,fraud and deception rose out o f the

cu r rupt heart o f man, when sincerity disappeared,then confidence disappeared also

,no man’s word was

any longer good . Then it was that , in order to putan end to their differences , they called upon God bv

128 M ORAL BRIEFS.

name to witness the truth o f what they affirmed . Theysubstituted God’s unquestioned veracity for their ownquestioned veracity, and incidentally paid homage toHis truth ; God went security for man . Necessitytherefore made man swear ; oaths became a substitutefo r honesty .

A reverent use o f the name of God,for a lawful

purpose, cannot be wrong ; o n the contrary, it is good,being a public recognition of the greatest O f God’sattributes— truth . But like all good things it is liableto be abused . A too frequent use of the oath willeasily lead to irreverence , and thence to perj ury. It isagainst this danger, rather than against the fact itselfo f swearing, that Christ warns us in a text that seemsat first blush to condemn the oath as evil . The commonsense of mankind has always given this interpretationto the words of Christ.

An oath,therefore

,is a calling upon God to

witness the truth o f what we say, and it means thatwe put our veracity on a par with His and make HimShoulder the responsibility of truthfulness .To take an oath we must swear by God . To

swear by all the saints in the calendar would not makean oath . Properly speaking , it is not even sufficientto Simply say '“I swear,

” we must use the name ofGod. In this matter , we first consider the words . Dothey signify a swearing, by God , either in their naturalsense or in their general acceptation ' Or is there anintention of giving them this signification ' Inconscience and before God, it is only when there issuch an intention that there is a formal oath and o n e

is held to the conditions and responsibilities thereof.Bear in mind that we are here dealing for the

moment solely with lawful swearing. There are suchthings as imprecation

,blasphemy, and general

profanity,of which there will be question later, and

which have this in common with the oath , that theycall o n the name o f God ; the differen ce is the same

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XXXVII .

OATHS .

TH E first quality o f an oath is that it be true . Itis evident that every statement we make

,whether

simple or sworn, must be true . If we affirm whatwe know to be false we lie, i f we swear to what weknow to be false, we perj ure ourselves . Perjuryis a sacrilegious falsehood, and the first Sin againstthe Second Commandment.

If, while firmly believing it to be true, what weswear to happens to be false, we are not guilty ofperjury, for the simple reason that ou r moral certitudeplaces us in good faith, and good faith guarantees a sagainst offending. The truth we proclaim under oathis relative not absolute , subj ective rather thanobj ective, that is to say, the statement we make istrue as far as we are in a position to know . All thisholds good before the bar o f conscience, but it maybe otherwise in the courts where something more thanpersonal convictions , something more akin to scientificknowledge, is required .

He who swears without Sufficient certitude ,Without a prudent examination o f the facts o f thequestion, through ignorance that must be imputed tohis guilt, that one takes a rash oath— a Sin great orsmall according to the gravity of the circumstances .It is not infrequently grievous .

Some oaths,instead of being statements , are prom

ises, sworn promises . That o f which we call God towitness the truth is not something that is , but something that will be . If on e promises under oath , and hasn o intention of redeeming his pledge ; o r if he after

OATH S. 13 1

wards revokes such an intention without serious reasons, and fails to make good his sworn promise, he sinsgrievously, fo r he makes a fool and a liar o f AlmightyGod who acts as sponsor of a false pledge . Concerningtemperance pledges, it may here be said that they aresimple promises made to God, but n ot being sworn to,are n ot oaths in any sense of the word.

Then, again, to be lawful, an oath must benecessary or useful, demanded by the glory o f God

,

our own o r our neighbor’s good ; and it must bepossible to fulfil the promise within the given time .Otherwise, we trifle with a sacred thing, we are guiltyo f taking vain and unnecessar y oaths . There can beno doubt ’ but that this is highly offensive to God, whois thus made little o f in His holy name.

This is the most frequent offense against theSecond Commandment, the Sin of profane swearing,the calling upon God to witness the truth of everysecond word we utter. It betrays in a man a veryweak sense of his own honesty when he cannot let hiswords stand for themselves . It betokens a blasphemousdisrespect for God Himself, represented by that namewhich is made a convenient tool to further everyvulgar end . It is therefore criminal and degrading,and the guilt thereby incurred cannot be palliated bythe plea o f habit. A sin is none the less a sin becauseit is one of a great many . Vice is criminal . Thevictim of a vice can be considered less guilty only o n

condition o f seriously combating that vice . Failingin this , he must bear the full burden o f his guilt .

Are we bound to keep our oaths' If valid, wecertainly are . An oath is valid when the matter thereofis not forbidden o r illicit. The matter is illicit whenthe statement o r promise we make is contrary to right.He who binds himself under oath to do evil

,not only

does not sin in fulfilin g his pledge , but would sinif he did redeem it. The sin he thus commits may be

132 M ORAL BRIEFS.

mortal o r venial according to the gravity o f the mattero f the oath. He sinned in taking the oath he sinsmore grievously in keeping it.The binding force of an oath is also destroyed by

fraud and deception . Fear may have a kindred effect,

if it renders on e incapable of a human act. Likewise aformer oath may annul a subsequent oath under certainconditions .

Again , no man in taking an oath intends to bindhimself to anything physically or morally impossible ,o r forbidden by his superiors ; he expects that hispromise will be accepted by the other party, that allthings will remain unchanged

,that the other party will

keep faith , and that there will be no grave reason forhim to change his mind . In the event o f any o f theseconditions failing of fulfilment his intention is not tobe held by his sworn word , and his oath is consideredinvalidated . He is to be favored in all doubts and isheld only to the strict words o f his promise .The least therefore we have to do with oaths

,the

better. They are things too sacred to trifle with.

When necessity demands it , let ou r swearing honorthe Almighty by the respect we Show His holy name .

CHAPTER XXXVIII .

VOWS .

Vows are less common than oaths , and this issomething to be thankful for, Since being even moresacred than oaths , their abuse incidental to frequentusage would be more abominable . The fact that menso far respect the vow as to entirely leave it alonewhen they feel unequal to the task o f keeping it

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

134 M ORA L BRIEFS.

fession never to sin again , o r in moments o f fervor toperform works o f virtue , are not vows . A promisemade to the Blessed Virgin or the saints is not a. vow ;it must be made directly to God Himself.

A promise made to God to avoid mortal Sin is n ota vow , in the strict sense of the word ; o r rather such apromise is outside the ordinary province o f the vow,

which naturally embraces works of supererogation andcounsel . It is unnecessary and highly imprudent tomake such promises under vow . A promise to commitsin is a bla sphemous outrage . If what we promise todo is something indifferent

,vain and useless , Opposed

to evangelical counsels o r generally less agreeable toGod than the contrary, our promise is null and void asfar as the having the character of a vow is concerned .

Of course, in taking a vow we must know whatwe are doing and be free to act o r not to act . If thenthe Object of the vow is matter o n which a vow mayvalidly be taken , we are bound in conscience to keepour solemn engagement. What we forbid ourselves

“

todo may be perfectly lawful and innocent, but by thatvow we forfeit the right we had to do it, and for us ithas become sinful . The peculiar position in which avow places a man in relation to his fellow-men concerning what is right and wrong, is the characteristic o f thevow that makes it the object o f much attention . Butit requires something lacking in the outfit of an in telligent man to perceive therein anything that savors ofthe unnatural , the unlawful o r the immoral .Concerning those whom a vow has constituted in

a profession , we Shall have a word to say later. Righthere the folly

,to say nothing stronger, o f those who

contract vows without thinking,must be apparent to

all . No o n e should dare take upon himself o r herselfsuch a burden of his o r her own initiative . It is anaffair that imperiously demands the services o f anoutside

,disinterested

,experienced party, whose pru

vows. 13 5

dence will well weigh the conditions and the necessityo f such a step . Without this , there is no end to thepossible misery and dangers the taking o f a vow maylead to .

If through an act o f unthinking foolishness o r

rash presumption, you find yourself weighed down

with the incubus o f a vow not made fo r your shoulders .the only way out is to make a clean breast o f the matterto your con fessor, and follow his direction s.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

THE PROFESSIONAL VOWS .

THE professional vow is a triple o n e, and embracesthe three great evangelical counsels o f perfect chastity,poverty and obedience . The Cloister is necessary forthe Observance o f such engagements as these, and itwere easier fo r a lily to flourish o n the banks o f theDead Sea, o r amid the fiery blasts of the Sahara , thanfor these delicate flowers o f Spirituality to thrive inthe midst o f the temptations , seductions and passions ofthe every day world o f this life . Necessity makes apractice of these virtues a profession .

It is good to be chaste , good to be obedient, goodto be voluntarily poor. What folly, then , to say thatit is unlawful to bind oneself by promises Of this kind ,since it is lawful to be good— the only thing that islawful 'It is n ot unlawful

,i f you will , to possess riches ,

to enjoy one’s independence,to wed ; but there is virtue

in foregoing these pleasures,and virtue is better than

its defect, and it is no more unlawful to do better thanto do good.

136 M ORAL BRIEFS.

If it is lawful to contract a solemn engagemen twith man ,

why not with God ' If it is lawful for ashort time

,why not for a long time ' If it is lawful for

two years,why n ot for ten, and a lifetime ' The

engagement is no more unlawful itself than that towhich we engage ourselves .The zealous guardians of the rights o f man protest

that, nevertheless , vows destroy man’s liberty, and

should therefore be forbidden,and the profession

suppressed . It is along this line that the governmentalmachine is being run in France at present . If the vowdestroys liberty, these fanatics are doing what appearsdangerously near being the same thing.

There is a decided advantage in being your ownslave-master over having another perform that servicefor you . If I do something which before God and myconscience I have a perfect right to do

,if I do it with

deliberate choice and affection, it is difficult to seewherein my liberty suffers . Again, if I decide not tomarry- a right that every man certainly has— and inthis Situation engage myself by vow to observe perfectchastity— which I must do to retain the friendship o f

God— I do not see how I forfeit my liberty by swearingaway a right I never had .

In all cases,the more difficult an enterprise a man

enters upon and pursues to a final issue, the more fullyhe exercises his faculty o f free will . And Since thetriple vow supposes nothing short of heroism in thosewho take it, it follows that they must use the veryplenitude of their liberty to make the thing possible .The “cui bono is the next formidable opponent

the vow has to contend with . What’s the good o f it '

Where is the advantage in leading such an impossibleexistence when a person can save his soul without it '

All are not damned who refuse to take vows . Is it notsufficient to be honest men and women '

That depends upon What you mean by an honest

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XL.

THE PROFESSION.

O NE of the advantages Of the monastic life,

created by vows , is that it is wholly in keeping withhuman nature such as God created it. Men differin their spiritual complexion more widely even thanthey do in menta l caliber and physical make-up. Allare n ot fitted by character and general condition fo rthe same career ; we are

“cut out” for ou r peculiartasks . It is the calling o f on e to be a soldier, ofanother to be a statesman, because each is best fittedby nature for this particular walk of life . The bornpoet, if set to put together a machine , will , in themajority of cases , make a sorry mess of the j ob, anda bricklayer will usually prove to be an indifferentstory-writer.

So also on e is called to be a good Christian, whilehis brother may be destined for a more perfect life . Ifthere are vocations in the natural life , why Shouldthere n ot be in the supernatural , which is just as trulya life' If variety o f aptitudes and likes determinedifference o f calling, why should this not hold goodfor the soul as well as for the body and mind' If o n eshould always follow the bent of one’s legitimatelynatural inclinations

,no fault can reasonably be found

if another hearkens to the voice of his soul’

s aspirationsand elect a career in harmony with his nature .

There are two roads o n which all men must travelto their destiny . One is called the way of Precept,the other the way of Counsel . In each the advantagesand inconveniences are about equally balanced . Theformer is wide and level with many joys and pleasuresalong the way ; but there are man y pitfalls and

THE PROFESSION. 139

stumbling blocks,while o n o n e side is a high, steep

precipice over which men fall to their eternal doom.

Those destined by Providence to go over this road arespiritually shod fo r the travel ; if they slip and tumble ,it is through their own neglect.

Some there are to whom it has been Shown byexperience— very little sometimes suffices— that theyhave

,for reasons known alone to God, been denied

the Shoe that does n ot slip ; and that if they do notwish to go over the brink, they must get o ff thehighway and follow a path removed from this danger,a path not less difficult but more secure for them .

Their salvation depends on it. This inside path , whileit insures safety for these

,might lead the others astray.

Each in his respective place will be saved ; if theyexchange places

,they are lost.

Then again , if you will look at it from anotherstandpoint, there remains still on earth such a thingas love o f God

,pure love o f God . And this love can

be translated into acts and life. Love, as all wellknow

,has its degrees o f intensity and perfection . All

well-born children love their parents , but they do notall love them in the same degree . Some are by naturemore affectionate

,some appreciate favors better, some

receive more and know that more is expected o f them .

In like manner,we who are all children o f the

Great Father are n ot all equally loving and generous .What therefore is more natural than that some Shouldchoose to give themselves up heart, soul and bodyto the exclusive service of God' What is thereabnormal in the fact that they renounce the worldand all its joys and legitimate pleasures

,fast

,pray and

keep vigil , through pure love o f God ' There is onlyo n e thing they fear, and that is to Offend God . Bytheir vows they put this misfortune without the paleo f possibility, as far as such a thing can be done by acreature endowed with free will .

Of course there are those for whom all this isunmitigated twaddle and bosh . To mention

140 M ORAL BRIEFS .

abnegation, sacrifice, etc . , to such people is to speakin a language no more intelligible than Sanskrit.Naturally one o f these will expect his children toappreciate the sacrifices he makes for their happiness,but with God they think it must be different.There was once a young man who was rich . He

had never broken the Commandments of God .

Wondering if he had done enough to be saved , hecame to the Messiah and put the question to Him.

The answer he received was,that

,if he were sinless ,

he had done well , but that there was a sanctity, notnegative but positive , which if he would acquire , wouldbetoken in him a charity becoming a follower o f a.

Crucified God . Christ called the young man to a lifeo f perfection . If thou wilt be perfect

,go

,sell what

thou hast, give to the poor, then come, and followme .” It is not known whether this invitation wasaccepted by the young man ; but ever since then it hasbeen the joy o fmen and women in the Catholic Churchto accept it, and to give up all in order to serve theMaker.

Scoffers and revilers Of monasticism are anecessary evil . Being given the course o f nature thatsometimes runs to freaks

,they must exist. Living,

they must talk,and talking they must utter ineptitudes .

People always do when they discourse o n things theydo not comprehend . But let this be our consolation °

monks are immortal . They were , they are, they evershall be. All else is grass .

CHAPTER XLI .

THE RELIGIOUS .

OWING to the disturbance over things religious inFrance

,vows and those who exemplify them in their

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

142 M ORAL BRIEFS.

become legitimate matter for discuss ion . We take itfor granted that intelligent men do not oppose aninstitution as venerable as monasticism without reasons .Contention between people who respect intelligence ISa lways based on what has at least a semblance o f truth,and has for its Obj ect to detect reality and label it asdistinct from appearance .

We go farther, and admit that there have beenabuses in this system of perfection , abuses that wewere the first to detect, the first to deplore and feelthe Shame o f it. But before we believed it

,we

investigated and made sure it was so. We found out

very often that the accusations were false . Scandalmongers and dishonest critics noted the charges,but forgot to publish the verdict, and naturally withthe public these charges stand . No wonder then thatsuch tales breed antipathy and hatred among thosewho are not in position to control facts .

A queer feature about this is that people do n o t

give religious credit fo r being human. That theyare flesh and blood, all agree ; that they should err, ispreposterous . A hue-and-cry goes up when it becomesknown that on e o f these children o f Adam has paidthe penalty o f being human . One would think anangel had fallen from heaven . We notice in thisattitude an unconscious recognition of the sanctity o f

the religious state ; but we see behind it a Pharisaicspirit that exaggerates evil at the expense o f justice .

Now , if the principle that abuse destroys use isapplied to all things

,nothing will remain standing,

and the best will go first. Co r ruptio Optimi pessima .

Everything human is liable to abuse ; that which is not,is divine . Religious and laymen , mortals all , the onlytime it is beyond ou r power to do wrong is when weare dead, buried, and twenty-four hours undergr ound .

If in life we make mistakes,the fault lies , n ot in our

being o f this o r that profession , but in being human .

Whatever,therefore

,the excesses that religious can be

proven guilty of,the institution itself must not be held

THE RELIGIOUS. 143

responsible, unless it can be Shown that there exists arelation o f cause and effect. And whoever reasonsotherwise, abuses the intelligence of his listeners .We desire, in the name of honesty and fairness ,

to see less o f that spirit that espies all manner o f evilbeneath the habit o f a religious ; that discovers inconvents and monasteries plotting against the Statein favor o f the Papacy, the accumulation o f untoldwealth by oppression and extortion for the satisfactiono f laziness and lust, iniquity o f the deepest dye alliedto general worthlessness . Common sense goes a longWay in this world . If it were only a less rarecommodity , and if an effective tribunal could beerected fo r the suppression o f mendacity, the religiouswould appear for the first time in history in theirtrue colors before the world, and light would shine indarkn ess.

CHAPTER XLII .

THE VOW OF POVERTY.

O NE objection to the vow of poverty thathas a serious face on it, and certainly looks wicked ,is that it does n ot prevent the accumulation o f greatwealth , as may be seen in the cases o f the PhilippineFriars and the French orders . This is o n e difficulty ;here is another and quite different ' the wealth of thereligious is excessive

,detrimental to the well-being o f

the people and a menace to the State . Takenseparately

,it is easy to dispose of these charges and

to explain them away . But if you put them togetherin on e loose, vague , general imputation o f avarice ,extortion and injustice

,and hurl the same at a person

unable to make distinctions,the shock is apt to

disconcert him for a moment.

144 M ORAL BRIEFS.

The first indictment seems to hint at acontradiction

,or at least an incompatibility, between

the profession o f poverty and the fact of possessingwealth . We claim that the one does not affect theother, that a religious may belong to a rich order andstill keep his vow inviolate . The vow in the religiousis individual and personal ; the riches collective . It isthe physical person that is poor ; the moral being hasthe wealth . Men may club together

,put their means

into a common fund, renounce all personal claimthereto, live o n a meagre revenue and employ thesurplus for various purposes other than their needs .The personal poverty o f such as these is real .This is the case of the religious . Personally they

do not own the clothes on their backs . The necessarieso f life are furnished them out of a common fund .

What remains , goes through their hands for the gloryof God and in charity to fellow-man. The employment to which these men devote their lives

,such as

prayer, charity, the maintenance and conducting of

schools and hospitals , is not lucrative to any greatextent . And since very few Orders resort to begging,the revenue from capital is the only means of assuringexistence . It is therefore no more repugnant forreligious to depend o n funded wealth than it was fo rthe Apostolic College to have a common purse. Thesecret reason for this condition o f things is that workso f zeal rarely yield abundant returns , and man cannotlive o n the air o f heaven .

A S to the extent o f such wealth and its dangers ,it would seem that if it be neither ill gotten noremployed for illegitimate purposes, in justice andequity

,there cannot be two opinions o n the subj ect.

Every human being has a right to the fruit o f hisindustry and activity. To deny this is to advocateextreme socialism and anarchy and , he who puts thisdoctrine into practice

,destroys the principle o n which

society rests . The law that strikes at religiouscorporations whose wealth accrues from centuries o f

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

146 M ORAL BRIEFS.

their riches are prejudicial to the welfare Of the people.

One reason is good ; two are better. If they contradict,it is only a trifling matter. As for us

,we don’t know

quite where we stand. We can hear well enough,

amid the din of denunciation,the conclusion that the

religious must go ; but we cannot, for the life o f us ,catch the why and wherefore . Is it because they aretoo poor ' or because they are too rich ' or becausethey are both ' We might be justified in thinking 'because they are neither, but because they are whatthey are— religious , devoted to the Church and

champions o f Her cause . This reason is at least asgood as the two that contradict and destroy each other.In this sense, is monastic poverty a bad and evil thing'

CHAPTER XLIII .

THE VOW OF OBEDIENCE.

WHAT kind o f obedience is that which makesreligious “unwilling to acknowledge an y superior butthe Pope '” We have been confidently informed thisis the ground given in several instances for theirremoval . And we confess that, if the words“acknowledge” and “superior” are used in certain o f

the meanings they undoubtedly have , there is goodand sufficient ground for such removal . At the sametime we submit that the foregoing phrase is open todifferent interpretations of meaning, severa l o f whichwould make out this measure of repression to be oneo f rank injustice .

The studied misrule and abuse of languageserves a detestable purpose that is only too evident.A charge like the above is true and false , that is to

THE vow OF OBEDIENCE. 147

say, it is neither true nor false ; it says nothing, unlessexplained, o r unless you make it say what you wish.

It is a sure, safe, but cowardly way of destroying anenemy without being obliged to admit the guilt tooneself.

Now the religious , and Catholic laity as well,never think o f acknowledging, in the full acceptationo f the word, any other spiritual superior than thePope, and there can be nothing in this deservingrepression . Again, no Catholic may consistentlywith Catholic principles , refuse to accept as legitimatethe legally constituted authority of the country inwhich he resides . A S to a man’s views on the differentforms o f government, that is nobody

’s business buthis own . But whether he approves o r disapproves intheory, his life and conduct must conform with thelaws justly enacted under the form o f Governmentthat happens to be accepted. To depart from thisrule is to go counter to Catholic teaching, and noreligious order does so without incurring strictcensure .The vow of obedience in a religious respects

Caesar as well as God . It cannot validly bindo n e to violate the laws ef State any more than to violate the law of God. This vow does n ot even concernitself with civil and political matters ; by it thereligious alone is affected

,the citizen looks out for

himself. But the citizen is already bound by hisconscience and the laws of the Church to respect andobey lawful authority .

A good religious is a good citizen, and he cannotbe the former

,if he is n ot the latter. A S a mere

Catholic,he is more liable to be always found o n the

side o f good citizenship , because in his religion he istaught

,first o f all , to respect authority on which all his

religious convictions are based . There is a naturaltendency in a Protestant

,who will have nothing to do

with authority in spiritual matters,to bring this state

o f mind over with him into temporary affairs ; being

148 M ORAL BRIEFS.

self-willed in greater things , he is fore-inclined to beself-willed in lesser. The Catholic and, fo r a greaterreason

,the religious knows less of this temptation ;

and the better Catholic and religious he is,the farther

removed he is from possible revolt against, o r even

disrespect O f, authority.

Against but on e Order o f all those repressed canthe charge of insubordination be brought with anyShow o f truth . The Assumptionists made the mistakeo f thinking that they could with impunity criticise thedoings of the Government, j ust as it is done in Parisevery day by the boulevard press . It is generally co nceded that, considering the well-known attitude o f theGovernment towards the order, this was a highlyimprudent course for a religious paper to pursue . Buttheir right to do so is founded on the privilege o f freespeech . It takes very little to find abuse o f free speechin the utterances o f the clergy or religious in France .

They are safe only when they are Silent. If therewere less docility and more defiance in their attitude,if the French Catholics relied less on God an d more o nman fo r redress , they would receive more justice thanthey have been receiving.

The punishment meted out to the religious for theirinsubordination has had

,we are told, a doleful effect

o n the temporal power of the Pope, an interestingpatch o f which has been broken up by the new Frenchlaw . It is a mystery to us how this law can affect thetemporal power o f the Pope any more than the political status O f Timbuctoo . It is passably difficult tomake an impression o n what has ceased to exist thesethirty years . We thought the tempora l power wasdead . This bit of news has been dinned into ou r earsuntil we have come to believe . No conference , synodo r council is considered by ou r dissenting friendswithout a good strong sermon on this topic. Strangethat it Should resurrect just in time to lose an interesting patch o f itself' This is cruelty . Why notr espect the grave' We recommend the perusal of the

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

M ORAL BRIEFS.

This is the chastity that is proper to rehgious, andit is more correctly called virginity. This is thenatural state of spirits who have no bodies ; cultivatedin the frail flesh o f children O f Adam, it is the mostdelicate flower imaginable . Considering the incessantstruggle it supposes in those who take such a vowagainst the spirit within us that is so strong

,the taking

and keeping o f it indicate a degree o f fortitude littleShort Of heroism . Only the few

,and that few relying

wholly on the grace o f God, can aspire to this state .From a spiritual point o f view ,

there can be noquestion as to the superiority of this state of life overall others . The teaching of St . Paul to the Corinthiansis too plain to need any comment, not to mention theexample o f Christ , His Blessed Mother, His disciplesan d all those who in the course o f time have loved Godbest and served Him most generously .

Prescinding from all spiritual considerations andlooking at things through purely human eyes , vowsof this sort must appear prejudicial to the propagationo f the species . In fact, they go against the law o f

nature which says ' increase and multiply, so we aretold .

If that law is natural as well a s positive , it iscertain that it applies to man collectively, and notindividually . It is manifested only in the instinctthat makes this duty a pleasure. Where the inclination is lacking

,the obligation is not obvious . That

which is repugnant is n ot natural , in any true sense ofthe word ; whether this repugnance be Of the in tellectual or spiritual order

,it matters not, for ou r nature is

spiritual as truly as it is animal . The law o f natureforces no man into a state that is not in harmony withhis sympathies and affections .

Nevertheless , it must be admitted that to a certainextent the race suffers numerically from an institutionthat fosters abstention from marriage . To whatextent , is an entirely different question . Not all laymen ma-r ry. It is safe to say that the vast majority o f

THE vow OF CHASTITY. 1 5 1

religious men , vow o r no vow, would never wed ; sothat the vow is not really to blame fo r their state , andthe consequences thereof. As fo r women

,statistics

show it to be impossible for all to marry Since theirn umber exceeds that of men .

Now , marriage with the fair sex, is very often amatter O f competition . Talent, beauty, character,disposition an d accomplishments play a very activerole in the acquisition o f a husband . Considering thatthe chances o f those who seek refuge under the veilare not of the poorest, Since they are the fairest andbest endowed o f ou r daughters , it would seem tofollow that their act is a charity extended to their lessfortunate Sisters who are thereby aided to success

,

instead o f being doomed to failure by the insufficiencyo f their own qualifications .Be this as it may, what we most strenuously

obj ect to, is that vows be held responsible fo r the sinso f others . In some countries and sections of countries ,the population is almost stationary in marked contrastto that o f others . Looking for the cause fo r thisunnatural phenomenon , there are who see it in theSpread o f monasticism , with its vow of chastity. Theyfail to remark that n ot numerous

,but large families

are the best Sign of vigor in a nation . Impurity, notchastity

,is the enemy of the race . Instead o f warring

against those whose lives are pure , why not destroythat monster that is gnawing at the very vitals of therace

,sapping its strength at the very font of l ife, that

modern Moloch,to whom fashionable society offers

sacrifice more abominable than the hecatombs o f

Carthage . This iniquity , rampant wherever the senseOf God is absent, and none other, is the cause whichsome people do not see because they have good reasonsfor not wanting to see . It is very convenient to havesomeone handy to accuse of one’s own faults . It istoo bad that the n ow almost extinct race o f Puritansdid n ot have a few monks around to blame fo r the

1 5 2 M ORA L BRIEFS.

phenomenon o f their failure to keep abreast o f therace .If celibacy, therefore, means untrammeled vice,

and marriage degenerates into New E n glan dism,the

world will get along better with less o f both . Vows,

if they have no other merit,respect at least the law

o f God, and this world is run according to that law.

CHAPTER XLV.

BLASPHEMY.

To blaspheme is to speak ill of God ; blasphemy isan utterance derogatory to the respect and honor dueto God . Primarily, it is a Sin Of the tongue ; but, likeall other Sins, it draws its malice from the heart .Thus , a thought may be blasphemous , even though theblasphemy remain unexpressed ; an d a gesture, oftentimes more expressive than a word

,may contain all

the malice Of blasphemy . This impiety therefore maybe committed in thought, in word and in deed .

Blasphemy addresses itself directly to God, toHis attributes and perfections which are denied, o r

ridiculed ; to Jesus Christ and the Blessed Sacrament ;indirectly

,through His Mother and His saints ,

through Holy Scripture and religion , through theChurch and her ministers in their quality o f ministers ,— all of which

,being intimately and inseparably

connected with the idea o f God, cannot be vilifiedwithout the honor o f God being affected ; and,consequently

,all contempt an d irreverence addressed

to them, takes on the nature o f blasphemy. Anindirect sin Of blasphemy is less enormous than a directoffense , but the difference is in degree , not in kind .

All error that affects God directly,or indirectly

through sacred things , is blasphemy whether the error

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

I 5 4 M ORAL BRIEFS.

undeserving are spared . They remark to themselvesthat the wicked always succeed, and entertain a strongsuspicion that if they were as bad as others certainthings would not happen .

All this smacks dangerously of revolt againstthe Providence o f God . Job’s problem is o n e that canbe solved only by faith a n d a strong spiritual sense .He who has it not is liable to get o n the wrongSide in the discussion ; and it is difficult to go veryfar on that Side without finding Providence at faultand thus becoming guilty of blasphemy. For , tomention partia lity in the same breath with God’scare o f the universe, is to deny Him .

The daily papers , a few years ago , gave publicnotoriety to two instances of blasphemy, and theirvery remarkable punishment

,for it is impossible n ot

to see the hand o f God in what followed so close uponthe offending. A desperate gambler called upon theAlmighty to strike him dumb

,if in the next deal a

certain card turned up . It did turn up , and at the lastaccounts the man had not yet spoken . Another castfrom his door a vendor of images and crucifixes

with a curse and the remark that he would rather havethe devil in his house than a crucifix . The very nextday, he became the father o f what came as near beingthe devil as anything the doctors o f that vicinity eversaw . These are not Sunday-school stories inventedto frighten children ; the facts occurred, and wereheralded broadcast throughout the land .

Despair urged the first unfortunate to defy theAlmighty . In the other ’twas hatred for the Churchthat honors the image o f Christ crucified as o n e

honors the portrait O f a mother. The blasphemy inthe second case reached God as effectively as in thefirst, and the outrage contained in both is o f an orderthat human language is incapable O f qualifying.

CHAPTER XLVI.

CURSING.

To bless o n e is not merely to wish that o n e Well,

but also to invoke good fortune upon his head,to

recommend him to the Giver of all goods . So,too

,

cursing, damning, imprecation, malediction— syn on ymous terms is stronger than evil wishing anddesiring. He who acts thus invokes a spirit o f evil

,

asks God to visit His wrath upon the obj ect cursed,

to inflict death, damnation, o r other ills . There isconsequently in such language at least an implicitcalling upon God , for the evil invoked is invoked o fGod, either directly o r indirectly . And that is whytheSecond Commandment concerns itself with cursing .

Thus it will be seen that this abuse o f languageoffends against religion and charity as well . To themalice o f calling down evil upon a brother’s head isadded the impiety o f calling upon God to do it, tocurse when He should be prayed to bless .

Of course all depends o n what is the Object o fo ur imprecations . One species o f this vice containsblasphemy pure and simple

,that is , a curse which

attains something that refers to God in an especialmanner

,and as such is cursed . The idea o f God

cannot be separated from that of the soul , o f faith ,o f the Church

,etc . Malediction addressed to them

reaches God,and contains all the malice o f blasphemy .

When the malediction falls on creatures, withoutany reference to their relationship to God, we havecursing in its proper form with a special malice of itsown . Directly

,charity alone is violated , but charity

has obligations which a r e binding under pain o f mortalsin . No man can sin aga inst himself o r against hisneighbor without offending God .

15 6 M ORAL BRIEFS.

A curse may be, and frequently is , emphasizedwith a vow o r an oath . One may solemnly promiseGod in certain contingencies that he will damn anotherto hell ; o r he may call upon God to witness hisexecrations . The malice Of two specific sins is hereaccumulated

,the offense is double in this one

abominable utterance ; nothing can be conceived morehorrible

,unless it be the indifferent frequency with

which it is perpetrated.

The guilt incurred by those who thus curse anddamfl, leaving aside the scandal which is therebynearly always given , is naturally measured by thedegree o f advertence possessed by such persons .Supposing full deliberation

,to curse a fellow-man or

self, if the evil invoked be o f a serious nature, is amortal sin .

Passion or habit may excuse,if the movement is

what is called “a first movement,

” that is, a mechanicalutterance without reflection o r volition ; also, if thehabit has been retracted and is in process o f reform .

If neither damnation nor death n o r infamy nor anymajor evil is invoked

,the Sin may be less grievous ,

but sin it always is . If the Obj ect anathematized isan animal

,a thing

,a vice , etc. , there may be a slight

Sin o r no Sin at all . Some things deserved to becursed . In damning others , there may be disorderenough to constitute a venial sin, without any greatermalice .Considering the case of a man who, far removed

from human hearing,Should discover too late, his

forgetfulness to leave the way clear between a blockand a fast-descending and ponderous ax , and, in a fitOf acute discomfort and uncontrollable feelingconsequential to such forgetfulness , Should consignblock

,ax

,and various obj ects in the immediate

vicinity to the nethermost depths o f Stygian darkness 'in such a case , we do not think there would be sin .

On the other hand,they in whose favor such

attenuating circumstances do n ot militate , do the office

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 5 8 M ORAL BRIEFS.

understood be supplied ; as they stand, they are oftenas meaningless to the speaker as to the generaluninitiated public. To get at the formal malice o f

such utterances is still more difficult,for it becomes

necessary to interpret the intentions o f the speaker.Thus , in o n e case, words that contain no evidentinsult to God may be used with all the vehemence o fprofanity, to which guilt is certainly attached ; inanother

,the most unholy language may be employed

in ignorance o f its meaning, with no evil intent, theonly danger o f malice being from habit

,passion or

scandal .This brings us to consider certain ej aculatory

o r exclamatory expressions such as 'God'good God 'Lord ' etc . , employed by persons o f very differentspiritual complexion . Evidently

,these words may be

employed in good and in evil part ; whether in one orthe other

,depends on the circumstances of their using.

They may proceed from piety and true devotiono f the heart , out of the abundance o f which the mouthspeaks . Far from being wrong, this is positively goodand meritorious .If this is done through force of habit, or isthe result o f levity, without the least interior devotiono r affection, it is a mitigated form of profanity. Tosay the least

,no honor accrues to God from such

language and such use o f His name ; and where He isconcerned

,not to honor Him is dangerously near

dishonoring Him . If contempt o f God or scandalresult from such language, the offense may easily bemortal .

Finally,excited feelings of passion or wrath vent

themselves in this manner, and here it is still moreeasy to make it a grievous Offending . About the onlything that can excuse from fault is absoluteindeliberation .

Again , without implying any malediction,

prescinding altogether from the supernatural charactero f what they represent

,as ejaculations only

,we come

PROFANITY. 1 5 9

across the use o f such words as hell, devil , damnation,etc

.Good ethics condemn such terms in conversation ;

hearing them used people may be scandalized,especially the young ; if one uses them with themistaken idea that they contain blasphemy, then thato n e is formally guilty o f blasphemy ; finally, it isvulgar

,coarse and unmannerly to do so . But all this

being admitted, we do not see any more moral iniquityin the mention of these words than o f their equiva lents 'eternal fire

,Satan

,perdition , etc . We do not advise

o r encourage the use of such terms, but it sometimesj ars one’s sense o f propriety to see people hold uptheir hands in holy horror at the sound o f these words ,as if their mention were something unspeakablywicked

,while they themselves would look fornication ,

for instance,straight in the face without a Shudder or

a blush .

Profanity is certainly a sin, sometimes a grievoussin ; but in our humble opinion , the fiat o f selfrighteous Pharisaism to the contrary notwithstanding,it is a few hundred times oftener no Sin at all , o r avery white sin , than the awful crime some people seein it. If a fellow could quote classical “M ehercule,

”

and Shakespearean cuss-words , he would not perhapsbe SO vulgar as to say “hell .” But not having suchlanguage at his command

,and being filled with strong

feelings that clamor for a good substantial expression ,if he looks around and finds these the strongest andonly available ones , and uses them ,

— it is necessity andhuman nature, we wot, more than sacrilegiousprofanity . It were better if his speech were aye

,aye

and nay , nay ; but it does not make it look any betterto convict him o f the blackest sin o n the calendarjust because he mentioned a place that really exists ,if it is hot

,and which it is well to have ever before

our eyes against the temptations o f life .

CHAPTER XLVIII .

THIRD COMMANDMENT

THE LAW OF REST.

THE last o f the three Commandments that referdirectly to God, prescribes a rest from toil , and profane works ; and in commemoration o f the mysticalrepose o f the Lord after the Six days’ creation

,

designates the Sabbath or seventh day as a day thatshall be set apart and made sacred to God. Thepeculiarity Of the commandment is that it interfereswith the occupations o f man , intrudes upon hisindividual affairs and claims a worship o f works .The others do not go thus far, an d are satisfied witha worship Of the heart and tongue

, o f affections andlanguage .

Leaving aside for the moment the special designation o f a day devoted to this worship , the law o f

rest itself deserves attention . Whether the Saturdayo r Sunday be observed, whether the rest be long o r

brief, a day o r an hour, depends entirely o n the positive will o f God . More than this must be said of thecommand o f rest ; that law grows o ut of our relationswith God, is founded in nature , is according to thenatural order o f things .This repose means abstention from bodily activity .

The law does not go so far as to prescribe stagnation and Sloth, but it is satisfied with such abstentionas is compatible with the reasonable needs o f man .

Of its nature,it constitutes an exterior, public act

o f religion . The question is 'Does the nature o f ourrelations with God demand this sort o f worship '

Evidently,yes . Else God

,who created the whole

man, would not receive a perfect worship . If God

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

162 M ORAL BRIEFS.

not be found where they did not on certain occasionsrest from work in order to offer the homage o f theirfidelity to their gods , and to listen to instruction andexhortation from their holy men . These pagansfollow the na tural law written in their souls, and itis there they discover the obligation they are underto honor God by rest from labor and to make holyunto Him a certain Space o f time.

CHAPTER XLIX .

THE DAY OF REST.

THE third article of the Mosaic Code not onlyenunciates the law o f rest, but says just how muchtime shall be given to its observance ; it prescribesneither a week nor a few hours , but o n e day in seven .

If you have a taste fo r such things and look well , youwill find several reasons put forth as j ustifying thisspecial designation o f o n e day in seven . The numberseven the Jews regarded as a sacred number ; theRomans

,as the symbol of perfection . Students of

antiquity have discovered that among nearly all peoplesthis number in some way or other refers to the Deity.

Science finds that nature prefers this number ; lightunder analysis reveals seven colors, and all colorsrefer to the seven orders Of the solar spectrum ; thehuman voice has seven tones that constitute the scaleo f sound ; the human body is renewed every sevenyears . Authorities on hygiene and physiology teachthat on e day in six is too much

, o n e day in eight isto o little, but that o n e day in seven is sufficient andnecessary for the physical needs of man .

These considerations may or may not carryconviction to the average mind . On the face o f it,they confirm rather than prove . They do not reveal

THE DAY OF REST. I 3

the necessity of a day o f rest so much as Show itsreasonableness and how it harmonizes with naturein its periodicity

,its symmetry and its exact proportion

to the strength o f man. As for real substantialreasons , there is but one,— a good and sufficien t,— andtha t is the positive will o f God. He said ' keep thisday holy ; such is His command ; no man should needa better reason .

The God-given law of Moses says Saturday,Christians say Sunday. Protestants and Catholicsalike say Sunday, and Sunday it is . But this is nota trifling change ; it calls for an explanation . Whywas it made' What is there to justify it ' On whatauthority was it done' Can the will of God, unmistakably manifested, be thus disregarded and put asideby His creatures' This is a serious question .

One of the most interesting things in the worldwould be to hear a Protestant Christian

, on Protestantgrounds , j ustify his observance of the Sunday insteado f the Sabbath, and give reasons for his conduct.“Search the Scriptures .” Aye, sea rch from Genesisto Revelations , the Mosaic prescriptions will holdgood in Spite o f all your researches . Instead ofjustification you will find condemnation .

“The Bible,

the Bible alone” theory hardly fits in here . ArePapists the only ones to add to the holy writings

, o r

to go counter to them ' Suppose this change cannotbe justified on Scriptural grounds

,what then' And

the fact is, it cannot.It is hardly satisfactory to remark that this is a

disciplinary injunction, and Christ abrogated theJewish ceremonial . But if it is nothing more thanthis , how came it to get o n the table o f the Law ' Itsembodiment in the Decalogue makes it somewhatdifferent from all other ceremonial prescriptions ; as itstands , it is on a par with the veto to kill or to steal

.

Chri st abolished the purely Jewish law,but he left the

Decalogue intact .Christ rose from the dead on Sunday

,

’tis true ;

164 M ORAL BRIEFS.

but nowhere in writing can it be found that Hisresurrection on that day meant a change in the ThirdCommandment. In the nature o f the event

,there is

absolutely no relation between it and the observanceof Sunday .

Where will our friend find a loop-hole to escape '

Oh'as usual , for the Sunday as fo r the Bible, he willhave to fall back o n the old Church . What in theworld could he do without her ' He will find there anauthority, and he is obliged to recognize it, even ifhe does on ordinary occasions declaim against andCondemn it . Incidentally, if his eyes are open, he willdiscover that his individually interpreted Bible hasfailed most woefully to do its work ; it condemns theProtestant Sunday.

This day was changed On the sole authority o f

theHoly Roman Catholic Church , as the representativeof God on earth , to whose keeping was confided theinterpretation o f God’s word , and in whose bosom isfound that other criterion of truth, called tradition .

Tradition it is that justifies the change She made .Deny this

,and there is no justification possible , and you

must go back to the Mosaic Sabbath . Admit it, and if

you are a Protestant you will find yourself in Somewhat o f a mess .

A logical Protestant must be a very uneasy being.

If the Church is right in this , why should she notbe right in defining the Immaculate Conception' Andif She errs here, what assurance is there that shedoes not err there ' How can he say she is right o no n e occasion , and wrong o n another ' What kind o f

nonsense is it that makes her truthful or erringaccording to one’s fancy and taste ' Truly

,the

reformer blundered when he did not treat the Sundayas he treated the Pope and all Church authority, for itis papistical to a degree .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

166 M ORAL BRIEFS .

mistaken notion that sloth and idleness are synonymouso f rest. It is n ot all activity, but the ordinary activityo f common life, that is forbidden . It were asacrilegious mockery to make God the author o f a lawthat fosters laziness and favors the sluggard . Anotherextreme that common sense condemns is that thephysical man should suffer martyrdom while the soulthus communes with God, that promenades andrecreation Should be abolished , and social amenitiesignored

,that dryness , gloom , moroseness and severity

are the proper conditions o f Sabbatical observance .In this respect, ou r Puritan ancestors were the

true children o f Pharisaism, and their Blue Lawsmore properly belong in the Talmud than in theConstitution of an American Commonwealth . Godloves a cheerful giver, and would yo u n ot j udge fromappearances that religion was painful to these piouswitch-burners and everything fo r God most grudginglydone' Sighs , grimaces , groans and wails , this is thehomage the devils in hell offer to the justice o f Godthere is no more place fo r them in the religion o f

earth than in the religion o f heaven .

Correlative with the obligation o f rest is that o fpurely positive worship

,and here is the difficulty o f

deciding just what is the correct thing in religiousworship . The Jews had their institutions , but Christabolished them . The Pagans had their way— sacr ifice ;Protestants have their preaching and hymn-singing.

Catholics offer a Sacrifice,too, but an unbloody o n e.

Later on ,we Shall hear the Church speak o ut on the

subject. She exercised the right to change the dayitself ; she claims naturally the right to say how itshould be observed , because the day belongs to her.And She will impose upon her children the obligationto attend mass . But here the precepts o f the Churchare out o f the question .

The obligation , however , to participate in someact of worship is plain . The First Commandmentcharges every man to offer an exterior homage o f o n e

KEEPING THE LORD’S DAY HOLY. 167

kind o r another, at some time or another. The Thirdsets aside a day for the worship o f the Divinity. Thusthe general command o f the first precept is specified.

This is the time, o r there is no time . With the ThirdCommandment before him

,man cannot arbitrarily

choose for himself the time for his worship,he must

do it o n Sunday.

Public worship being established in all Christiancommunities , every Christian who cannot improveupon what is offered and who is convinced that acertain mode o f worship is the best and true , is boundby the law to participate therein . The obligation maybe greater if he ignores the principles o f religionand cannot get information an d instruction outside thetemple o f religion . F o r Catholics , there is only o n e

true mode o f public worship , and that is the Sacrificeo f the Mass . NO layman is sufficient unto himselfto provide such an act of religion. He has , therefore ,no choice

,he must assist at that sacrifice if he would

fulfil the Obligation he is under of Sunday worship .

CHAPTER LI .

WORSHIP OF SACRIFICE .

WE Catholics contend,and our contention is

based on a law of nature that we glean from thehistory Of man

,that sacrifice is the soul o f religion ,

that there never was a universally and permanentlyaccepted religion— and that there cannot be any suchreligion— without an altar

,a victim

, a priest , and asacrifice. We claim that reason and experience wouldbear us out in this contention

,even without the

example and teaching and express commands o f Jesus

168 M ORAL BRIEFS .

Christ, who, in founding a new and the only truereligion, Himself offered sacrifice an d left a sacrificeto be p erpetually Offered in His religion ; and thatsacrifice constitutes the high worship we owe to theCreator.It is our conviction that

,when man came into

the presence o f the Almighty,his first impulse was

to speak to Him, and his first word was an act ofadoration . But human language is a feeble mediumo f communication with the Almighty. Man talks toman . To talk with God

,he sought out another

language ; and, as in the case of Adam’s sons , he

discovered in sacrifice a better and stronger mode ofexpressing his religious feelings . He therefore offeredsacrifice

,and sacrifice became the language of man in

his relations with the Deity.

In its Simplest definition,sacrifice is the offering

to God of a victim , by one authorized for that task.

It supposes essentially the destruction of the victim ;and the act is an eloquent acknowledgment, inlanguage that is as plain as it possibly can be made,that God is the supreme Lord of life and death, thatall things that exist come from Him , and revert toHim as to their natural end .

The philo sophy of sacrifice is that man, in somemanner o r other, had incurred the wrath of theAlmighty. The pagan could not tell in just what hisoffense consisted ; but there is nothing plainer than thefact that he considered himself under the ban o f God’sdispleasure

,and that sin had something to do with it ;

and he feared the Deity accordingly. We kn ow thatoriginal sin was the curse under which he labored .

Whatever the offense was, it was in the flesh ,the result o f weakness rather than malice . There wassomething in his nature that inclined to evil and wasresponsible for sin . The better part tried to serve, butthe inferior man revolted . Flesh

,therefore, was

wicked and Sinful ; and Since all offense must be atonedfo r , the flesh Should pay the penalty Of evil . The

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

170 M ORAL BRIEFS.

the practice of the divinely in spired Church whichmakes sacrifice the soul o f her wo rship .

The victim we have is Jesus Christ Himself, andnone other than He. He gave us His flesh and bloodto consume

,with the command to consume . Our

sacrifice,therefore

,consists in the offering up of this

Victim to God and the consuming o f it. Upon theVictim of the altar, as upon the Victim o f the Cross ,we lay ou r sins and offenses

,an d, in o n e case as in the

other, the sacred blood , in God’s eyes

,washes our

iniquity away .

Of course , it requires faith to believe, but religionis nothing if it is not whole and entire a matter o f

faith . The less faith you have,the more you try to

simplify matters . Waning faith began by eliminatingauthority an d sacrifice and the unwritten word . Nowthe written word is going the same way. Pretty soonwe shall hear o f the Decalogue’s being subjected tothis same eliminating process . After all , when o n e

gets started in that direction,what reason is there

that he should ever stop'

CHAPTER LII .

WORSHIP OF REST.

PARTICIPATION in public worship is the positiveObligation flowing from the Third Commandment ;abstention from labor is what is negatively enjoined .

Now ,works differ as widely in their nature as differ

in form and dimension the pebbles on the sea—shore .

There are works of God and works o f the devil, andworks which , as regards spirituality, are totally

WORSH IP OF REST. 171

indifferent, profane works , as distinguished fromsacred and sinful works . And these latter may becorporal o r intellectual or both . Work or labor o r toil

,

in itself, is a spending o f energy,an exercise o f

activity ; it covers a deal o f ground . And Since the lawsimply says to abstain from work, it falls to us todetermine j ust what works are meant, fo r it is certainthat all works

,that is , all that come under the general

head o f work, do n ot profane the Lord’S day .

The legislation o f the Church, which is thecustodian of the Sunday, o n this head commends itselfto all thoughtful men ; while , for those who recognizethe Church as the true one , that legislation is authority .

The Church distinguishes three kinds of profaneworks

,that is

,works that are neither sacred nor

iniquitous of their nature . There is on e kind whichrequires labor of the mind rather than Of the body.

These works tend directly to the culture o r exerciseof the mind, and are called liberal works, becauseunder the Romans

,freemen o r

“liberi” almostexclusively were engaged therein . Such are reading,writing

,studying

,music, drawing— in general , mental

occupations in whole, o r more mental than corporal .These works the Church does not consider the lawincludes in its prohibition , and they are consequentlynot forbidden .

It is impossible here to enumerate all that entersinto this class of works ; custom has something to sayin determining what is liberal in our works ; and ininvestigating, we must apply to each case the genera lprinciple . The labor in

'

question may be gratuitousor well paid ; it may cause fatigue or afford recreation 'all this is not to the point. The question is, outside thedanger o f omitting divine service

,scandal o r circum

stances that might lead to the annoyances anddistraction o f others— the question is 'does this workcall for exercise o f the mind more than that o f thebody ' If the answer is affirmative

,then the work

is liberal , and as such it is not forbidden on Sunday,

72 M ORAL BRIEFS .

it is not considered a profanation o f the Lord’s day .

On the other extreme are what go by the nameo f servile works , which call forth principally bodilyeffort and tend directly to the advantage o f the body .

They are known also as works Of manual labor .Before the days o f Christianity

,slaves alone were

thus employed , and from the word“servi” or slaves

these are called servile works .Here again it is the nature o f the work that makes

it servile . It may be remunerative o r not, recreativeo r not, fatiguing o r not ; it may be a regular occupation ,o r just taken up for the moment ; it may be , outsidecases o f necessity, for the glory o f God o r fo r thegood Of the neighbor . If it is true that the body hasmore part therein than the mind

,then it is a servile

work and it is forbidden . Of course there are seriousreasons that dispense us from o u r Obligation to thislaw

,but we are not talking about that just at present .The reason o f the proscription is , not that such

works are evil,but that they interfere with the intention

we should give to the worship we owe to God, andthat

,without this cessation o f labor, ou r bodily health

would be impaired ' these are the two motives o f thelaw . But even if it happened, in an individual case ,that these inconveniences were removed , that neitherGod’s reverence n o r one’s own health suffered fromsuch occupations as the law condemns

,the obligation

would still remain to abstain therefrom, for it isgeneral and absolute

,and when there is question of

obeying a law , the subj ect has a right to examinethe law, but not the motives of the law .

We shall later see that there are other works ,called common , which require activity of the mind ando f the body in about an equal measure o r which enterinto the common necessities o f life . These are notforbidden in themselves

,although in certain

contingencies they may be adjudged unlawful ; but, inthe matter o f servile works , nothing but necessity, thegreater glory o f God, or the good o f the neighbor, can

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

174 M ORAL BRIEFS.

to be guilty of a contradiction in terms . All thingstherefore needed for the preparation an d becomingcelebration o f the rites of religion, even though Of aservile nature, are lawful and do n ot come under thehead of this prohibition .

The law ceases likewise to bind when itsobservance would prevent an act o f charity towardsthe neighbor in distress , necessity, or pressing need .

If the necessity is real and true charity demands it,

in matters not what work, not intrinsically evil , is tobe done

,on what day o r fo r how long a time it is to

be done ; charity overrides every law ,fo r it is itself

the first law o f God. Thus , if the neighbor is indanger o f suffering, o r actually suffers , any injury,damage o r ill , God requires that we give ou r servicesto that neighbor rather than to Himself. As a mattero f fact, in thus serving the neighbor, we serve Godin the best possible way.

Finally, necessity, public as well as personal ,dispenses from obligation to the law . In time o f war,all things required for its carrying o n are licit. It islawful to fight the elements when they threatendestruction, to save crops in an interval of fine weatherwhen delay would mean a risk ; to cater to publicconveniences which custom adjudges necessary,— andby custom we mean that which has at least the implicitsanction o f authority,— such as public conveyances ,pharmacies , hotels , etc. Certain industries run bysteam power require that their fires should not beput out altogether, and the labor necessary to keepthem going is not considered illicit. In general , allservile work that is necessary to insure against seriousloss is lawful .

A S for the individual, it is easier to allow him totoil on Sunday, that is , a less serious reason is required,i f he assists at divine worship

,than in the contrary

event . One can be justified in omitting bothobligations only in the event of inability otherwiseto provide for self and family. He whose occupation

SERVILE WORKS. 175

demands Sunday labor need not con sider himselfguilty so long as he is unable to secure a positionwith something like the same emoluments ; but it ishis duty to regret the necessity that prevents himfrom fulfiling the law , and to make efforts to betterhis condition from a spiritual point o f view,

even ifthe change does not to any appreciable extent better itfinancially ; a pursuit equally available should bepreferred . Neglect in seeking out such an ameliorationo f situation would cause the necessity of it to ceaseand make the delinquent responsible fo r habitualbreach o f the law .

If it is always a sin to engage without necessityin servile works on Sunday, it is not equally sinfulto labor little o r labor much. Common sense tells usthat all ou r failings are not in the same measureoffensive to God, fo r they do n ot all contain the sameamount of malice and contempt o f authority . A personwho resolves to break the law and persists in workingall day long, is o f a certainty more guilty than hewho after attending divine service fails SO far as tolabor an hour. The question therefore is , how longmust o n e work on Sunday to be gui lty o f a mortal5 111 .

The answer to this question is ' a notable time ;but that does n ot throw a very great abundance o f

light on the subject . But surely a fourth of the wholeis a notable part. Now , considering that a day

’s workis

,n ot twenty-four hours , but ten hours , very rarely

twelve,frequently only eight

,it will be seen to follow

that two hours’ work would be considered a notablebreach of the law o f rest . And this is the decisiono f competent authority . Not but that less might makeus grievously guilty, but we may take it as certainthat he who works during two full hours , at a laborconsidered servile, without sufficien t reason, commitsa mo rtal sin .

CHAPTER LIV.

CO M‘

M'

IO'

N WORKS .

THERE is a third sort o f works to be consideredin relation to Sunday Observan ce

,which

,being o f their

n ature neither liberal nor servile, go by the specific

name of common works . This class embraces worksof two kinds , viz . , those which enter into the common ,daily, inevitable necessities Of life, and those in whichthe mind and body are exerted in an equal measure .The former a re n ot considered servile because

they are necessary, not in certain circumstances , butat all times , for all persons , in all conditions o f life .Activity o f this kind , so universally and imperiouslydemanded, does not require dispensation from the law,

as in the case o f necessary servile works properlySo -ca lled ; but it stands outside all legislation and isa law unto itself.These works are usually domestic occupations ,

as cooking and the preparation o f victuals , the keepingo f the house in becoming tidiness , the proper care o fchildren

, o f beasts o f burden and domestic animals .People must eat

,the body must be fed , life requires

attention on Sunday as well as on the other six days ;and in no circumstances can this labor be dispensedwith. Sometimes eatables for Sunday consumptionmay be prepared o n the previous day ; if this is notdone

,whether through forgetfulness , neglect o r

indifference , it is lawful o n Sunday to prepare a goodtable , even on e more sumptuous than on ordinarydays . F o r Sunday is a day of festival

,and without

enthusing over the fact, we must concede that thewords feast and festival are synonymous in human

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

178 M ORAL BRIEFS .

1 . They must n ot expose us to the danger ofomitting divine service . The obligation to positivelySanctify the day remains intact. Sin may becommitted , slight or grievous , according as the dangerto which we expose ourselves , by indulging in thesepursuits , Of missing public worship , is more o r lessremote

,more or less probable .

2 . These works become illicit when they areexcessive

,when too much time is given to them

,when

the body receives too large a share of the exercise ,when accompanied by overmuch application , Show o r

fatigue . In these cases , the purpose of the law isdefeated, the works are considered no longer commonand fall under the veto that affects servile works . Anaggravating circumstance is that o f working for thesole purpose of gain, as in the case o f professionalbaseball, etc .

3 . Lastly,there are exterior circumstances that

make these occupations a desecration o f the Lord’sday, and as such evidently they cannot be tolerated .

They must not be boisterous to the extent of disturbingthe neighbor’s rest and quiet, o r detracting from thereverence due the Sabbath they must n ot entice othersaway from a respectful observance o f the Lord’s dayo r offer an opportunity o r occasion for sin , cursing,blasphemy and foul language , contention a n d drunkenness ; they must not be a scandal for the community.

Outside these contingencies of disorder, theSabbath rest is n ot broken by indulgence in worksclassified as common works . Such activity, in allcommon sense and reason, is compatible with thereverence that God claims as His due on His day.

CHAPTER LV.

PARENTAL DIGNITY.

WE have done with the three commandmentsthat refer directly to God . The second Table o f theLaw contains seven precepts that concern themselveswith ou r relations to God

,indirectly, through the

creature ; they treat o f ou r duties and obligationstoward the neighbor . As God may be honored, so Hemay be dishonored

,through the works o f His hand ;

o n e may offend as effectively by disregard for thelaw that binds us to God’s creatures as for that whichbinds us to the Creator Himself.

Since parents are those of God’s creatures thatstand nearest to uS, the Fourth Commandmentimmediately orders us to honor them as the authorso f our being and the representatives o f divineauthority

,and it prescribes the homage we owe them

in their capacity of parents . But that which appliesto fathers and mothers , applies in a certain degreeto all who have a n y right o r authority to command ;consequently, this law also regulates the duties o f

superiors and inferiors in general to o n e another .The honor we owe to ou r parents consists in four

things ' respect for their dignity,love for their

ben eficen ce, obedience to their authority and assistancein their needs . Whoever fails in o n e o f theserequirements , breaks the law , offends God and sins .His Sin may be morta l , if the quality o f the offenseand the malice o f the offender be such as to constitutea ser lous breach of the law

.

’

Tis the great fault o f ou r age to underrateparental dignity . In the easy-going world

,preference

180 M ORAL BRIEFS.

is given to profligate celibacy over honorable wedlock ;ma r r Iage itself is degraded to the level of a purel yn atural contract, its bond has lost its character Ofindissolubility and its obligations are Shirked to meetthe demands of fashion and convenience . Whenparents , unworthy ones , do not appreciate their owndignity, how will others , their children, appreciate it 'And pa renthood will never be esteemed while its truen ature and sanctity are ignored and contemned ; thereis no dignity where the idea o f God is excluded .

After God had created man,He left him to work

out his destiny in a natural way ; and immediately manassumed towards his Offspring the rela tion that Godfirst held towards himself— he assumed the prerogatiy es o f paternity and o f authority. All paternitybelongs to God , and to Him alone ; yet man is delegatedto that lofty, quasi-divine function . God alone cancreate ; yet so nea r does the parental Office approachto the power of creation that we call it pro -creation .

’Tis true,this privilege man holds in common

with the rest o f animated nature, but with thisdifference 'that the fruit o f his loins is a child o f God ,with an immortal soul , an heir to heaven where itsdestiny is to glorify the Eternal during all eternity .

And thus,man

,in his function o f parent , is as far

differentiated from the rest o f animal nature as theact by which God created man is superior to all Hisother creative acts .If the tempter

,when working out his plan for the

fall of ou r first pa rents , had simply and unconditionallysaid ' “Ye shall be as gods ,

” his utterance wouldhave in it more truth than he intended

,for the mantle

o f parenthood that was soon to fall upon them madethem like unto God. The children that romped aroundthem , looked up to them even , almost, as they wereaccustomed to look up to the Creator. And littie thewonder, since to their parents they owed their veryexistence .

As depositaries o f authority,there is no human

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

182 M ORAL BRIEFS.

It is much easier to say in what respect doesn ot consist than to define the term itself. If it reallyexists in the heart— and there it must exist

, to beat all— it will find expression in a thousand differentways , and will never be at a loss to express itself.Books will give you the laws o f etiquette and willtell you how to be polite ; but the laws that governrespect are graven on the heart

,and he whose heart

is in the right place never fails to read and interpretthem correctly . Towards all

,at all times and in all

places , he will conform the details o f his life withthe suggestions o f his inner consciousness— this isrespect.

Respect has no substitute ; neither assistance n o r

obedience n or love can supply it o r take its placeIt may happen that children are no longer obligedto help their parents ; they may be justified in notobeying them ; the circumstances may be such thatthey no longer have love o r affection fo r them ; butrespect can never be wanting without serious guilt.The reason is simple ' because it is due in justice ,because it is founded on natural rights that can neverbe forfeited

,even when parents themselves lose the

sense o f their own dignity.

S inful,wicked and scandalous parents there have

been,are

,and will be . But j ust as they do not owe

the excellence to any deed Of their own , but to thefree choice o f the Almighty, so it depends not o n

themselves to forfeit it . God made them parentsWithout respect for their personal worth . He is thecustodian o f their dignity . Good or bad , they areparents and remain parents . Woe unto those whodespise the authors o f their days '

Respect overlooks an innocent j oke at the ex

pense of a parent,when absolutely no malice is ih

tended,when o n both sides it is looked upon as a

matter of good-natured pleasantry. It brooks humor.Not all familiarity breeds contempt.But contempt, which is directly opposed to re

PARENTAL DIGNITY. 183

spect, is a sin that is never anything but mortal . Itrefuses honor, belittles dignity and considers parentsbeneath esteem . It is contempt to laugh at

, to mock,to gibe and insult parents ; it is contempt to call themvile

,opprobrious names

,to tell of their faults ; it is

contempt,and the height o f contempt, to defy them ,

to curse them or to strike them . It is bad enoughwhen this sort o f thing is directed against an equal ;but when parents are made the obj ects o f contempt,it acquires a dignity that is infernal .The malediction o f Heaven

,the a lmighty wrath

o f God follows him o r her who despises a parent .We are repeatedly told in Holy Writ that suchoffenders “shall die the death .

”Scorn o f parents

is looked upon as a crime almost o n a par with hatredo f God . Pagans frequently punished it with death .

Among Christians it is left to the avenging wratho f God who is pledged to defend the dignity o f Hisdelegated paternity .

It is n ot a rare occurrence to see just retributionvisited upon parents who in their day were undutiful ,unworthy and unnatural children . The justice o f

Heaven often permits it to be done unto us as we dounto others . Our children will treat us as we Shallhave treated o u r parents ; their hands will be raisedagainst us and will smite us o n the cheek to avengethe grandsire’s dishonor and tears

,and to make us

atone in shame for o u r sins against o u r parents . Ifwe respect others , they will respect us ; if we respectour parents , ou r children will respect us .

CHAPTER LVII .

FILIAL LOVE .

HE who has a heart, and has it properly located,will n ot fail to love that which is good ; he will haveno difficulty in so doing, it will require neither command n o r persuasion to make him do so. If he provesrefractory to this law of nature, it is because he is notlike the rest o f mortals, because he is inhuman ; andhis abnormal condition is due

,not to nature’s mis

takes , but to his own . And no consideration underheaven will be equal to the task of in stiling affectioninto a stone o r a chunk o f putty.

That is good which is desirable, o r which isthe source of what is desirable . God alone is absolutely good, that is to say, good in Himself and thecause of all good. Created things are good in the

proportion o f their furnishing us with things desirable

,and are fo r that reason called relatively good .

They confer benefits on on e and n ot perhaps onanother. When I say ' this o r that is good, I meanthat it is useful to me , and is productive o f comfort,happiness and other desirable things . Because weare naturally selfish

, ou r appreciation o f what is gooddepends o n what we get out o f it.Therefore

,it is that a child’s first, best and

strongest love should be for its parents , for thegreatest good it enjoys

,the thing of all others to be

desired , the essential condition of all else , namely itsexistence , it owes to its parents . Life is the boon wereceive from them not only the giving

,but the saving

in more than one Instance,the fostering and preserv

ing and sustaining during long years of helplessness ,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

186 M ORAL BRIEFS.

latter and has no meaning without it. In normalconditions , this conflict never occurs ; it can occuronly in the event of parents overriding the law thatgoverns their station in life . To make divine lovewait o n the human is crimin al.It may, and no doubt does , happen that parents

become unlovable beings through disregard for themoral law . And because love is not a commoditythat is made to order, children may be found whojustify on these grounds their absence of a ffectiono r even their positive hatred for such parents . Adrunken parent, o n e who attacks the life

,virtue o r

reputation of his offspring,a low brute who has

neither honor n o r affection, and whose office it isto make home a living hell

,such a o n e can hardly be

loved .

But pity is a form o f love ; and just as we maynever despise a fallen parent, j ust so do we owe himo r her, even in the depths o f his o r her degradation,a meed of pity and commiseration . There is n o

erring soul but may be reclaimed ; every soul is worththe price of its redemption

,and there is no un fo r

tun ate , be he ever so low , but deserves , for the sakeof his soul

,a tribute of sympathy and a prayer fo r

his betterment. And the child that refuses this, however just the cause o f his aversion, offends againstthe law of nature , of charity and of God .

CHAPTER LVIII .

AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE .

AUTHORITY means the right to ’command ; tocommand is to exact obedience, and obedience is thesubmission o f one’s will to that of another. Thewill is a faculty that adores its own independence , is

AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE. 187

ambitious o f rule and dominion , and can hardly bearto serve . It is made free , and may not bend ; it isproud, and hates to bend ; some will add, it is thedominant faculty in man, and therefore should n ot

bend .

Every man for himself ; we are born free ; all menare equal , and no on e has the right to impose his willupon another ; we are directly responsible to God, and“go

-betweens” a re repudiated by the common sense ofmankind , —this is good Protestant theory and it ismost convenient and acceptable to the unregenerateheart of man . We naturally like that kind of talk ;it appeals to us instinctively. It is a theory thatpossesses many merits besides that o f being true in a

sense in which only on e takes it out of fifty whoadvocate it.But these advocates are careful— and the reason

o f their solicitude is anything but clear— to keep withinthe religious lines

,and they never dare to carry their

theory into the domain o f political society ; their hardcommon sense forbids . And they a r e likewise carefulto prevent their children from practicing the doctrinewithin the realm of paternal authority, that is , ifthey have any children . Society calls it anarchy, andparents call it “unnatural cussedness in religion itis “freedom of the children of God'”

If there is authority,there must be obedience ;

if o n e has the right to command , there a rises in othersthe correlative duty and obligation to submit. Thereis no question o f how this will suit us ; it simply doesnot , and will not, suit us ; it is hard , painful andhumiliating, but it is a fact, and that is sufficient.

Likewise, it is a fact that if authority was evergiven by God to man

,it was given to the parent ; all

men, Protestants and anarchists alike , admit this . Thesocial being and the religious being may rej ect andrepudiate all law, but the child is subj ect to its parents ,it must obey . Failing in this

,it sins .

Disobedience is always a sin,if it is disobedience

,

188 M ORAL BRIEFS.

that is, a refusal to submit, in things that are j ust, tothe express command o f paternal authority . The sinmay be slight o r grievous , the quality o f its malicedepending on the character of the refusal

, o f thethings commanded a n d o f the command itself. Inorder that the offense may be mortal

,the refusal must

be deliberate, containing an element o f contempt, asall malicious disobedience does . The command mustbe express , peremptory, absolute . And nothing mustbe commanded dOn e that may not reasonably bea ccomplished o r is not within the Sphere of parentaljurisdiction o r is contrary to the law of God .

An order that is unreasonable o r unlawful isinvalid . Not only it may, but it should be, disregarded .

It is not sufficient fo r a parent, wishing to oblige underpain o f grievous sin , that he ask a thing done , that heexpress his mind on the matter ; he must order it andleave n o room to doubt that he means what he says .There may be disobedience without this peremptorinessof command, but it cannot be a serious fault . It iswell also to make certain allowance for the levity andthoughtlessness o f youth , especially in matters whoseimportance is beyond their comprehension .

It is generally admitted that parenta l authority,exercised in things that concern good morals and thesalvation of the soul , can scarcely ever be ignoredwithout mortal offending. This means that besides thesin committed— if the prohibition touches matters o f

sin— there is a sin specifically different and a grievousone

, o f disobedience ; by reason of the parentalprohibition

,there are two sins, instead o f o n e. This

Should be remembered by those who, against theexpress command o f their parents , frequent badcompanions , remain on the street at night, neglecttheir religious duty, etc.

Parents have nothing to say in the choice theirchildren make o f a state in life

,that is

,they may

suggest, but must n ot coerce . This is a matter thatdepends on personal tastes and the inner voicings of

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

190 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Heaven . The obligation follows them during life ,

wherever they go ; and they can no more Shirk it thanthey can efface the cha racters that declare it

,graven

o n their hearts . Nothing but sheer impossibility candispense them .

So sacred and inviolable is this obligation that itpasses before that o f assisting wife and children

,the

necessity being equal ; for filial obligations enjoy thedistinction o f priority . Not even engagementscontracted before God hold against the duty o f

relieving parental distress and want,fo r vows are of

counsel and must yield to the dictates o f natural an ddivine law .

Of course , the gravity of this obligation isproportionate to the stress o f necessity under whichparents labor. To constitute a mortal sin o f neglect

,

it is not necessary that a parent be in the extreme o fprivation and beggary . It is n o t easy to draw the linebetween slight and grievous offending in this matter

,

but if some young men and women examined theirconscience as carefully as

’

they do their new springsuits and hats , they would find ma terial for confessionthe avowal of which might be necessary to confessionalintegrity .

It has become the fashion with certain of the risinggeneration

,after draining the family exchequer for

some sixteen o r eighteen years , to emancipate themselves as soon as their wages cover the cost of living,with a little surplus . They pay their board , that is tosay

,they stand towards their parents as a stranger

would,and forgetting the debt their younger years

have piled up against them,they hand over a miserable

pittance just enough to cover the expenses of bed andboard . This might, and possibly does , make themfeel big

,

” but that feeling is a false o n e, and thebigness” experienced is certainly not in their mora lworth , in many cases such conduct is a prevaricationagin st the law of God . This applies with equal force toyoung women whose vanity overrides the claims of

SHOULD WE HELP OUR PARENTS' 191

cha rity and justice, and who are said to put all theirearnings on their backs ,

” while they eat the bread thatanother earns .

Frequently children leave home and leave alltheir obligations to their parents behind them at home .

If their letters are rare, enclosed checks are still rarer .They like to keep the old folks informed o f the factthat it costs a good deal to live away from home . Theysometimes come home o n a visit ; but these are visits ;and visitors

,even if they do stay quite a while, do

not pay board .

But pecuniary assistance 13 not all ; it is occasionallycare and attention an aged parent requires , the presenceo f a daughter who prefers the gaiety o f the city to thequiet of the old homestead that is imperiouslydemanded . If the parent be feeble or sick, theundutiful child is criminally negligent ; the crime is stillgreater if there be danger through that absence o f theparent’s dying without religious consolation .

I have said nothing of that unnatural specimen o fhumanity, sometimes called a

“loa fer,” and by still

more ignoble names, who , to use a vulgar term ,“grubs” o n his parents , drinks what he earns andbefouls the home he robs

,with his loathsome presence

and scandalous living. The least said of him thebetter. He exists ' ’tis already too much said.

CHAPTER LX .

DISINTERESTED LOVE IN PARENTS .

LOVE seems to resume all the obligations o f parentstoward their offspring ; certainly, it directs all theiractions , and they fulfil these obligations ill o r wellaccording to the quality of that love . But love is

92 M ORAL BRIEFS.

not sufficient love is o f two kinds,the right and the

wrong ; nothing good comes o f an affection that isnot properly ordered . In itself

,parental love is natural

,

instinctive ; therefore it is n ot meritorious to any highdegree. But there is much merit in the proper kindof parenta l affection, because it requires sacrifice.There may be too little love , to the neglect and

misfortune of children . There may be too much,to

their spoiling and utter perversion . Again theremay be affection that is partial , that Singles out o n e

fo r caresses a nd favors to the exclusion of the others ;hence discord and dissensions in the family. Thefirst two forms of inordinate affection are equally bad,while the last combines both and contains the doubleevil thereof. It is hard to say which is the worseoff, the child that receives too much o r the o n e thatreceives too little of that love which to be correctshould avoid extremes .Parents are apt, under the sway of natural

affection , to overlook the fact that God has rights overthe children, and that the welfare and interests o f thechildren must not be left outside all consideration 'herein lies the root o f all the evil that befalls thefamily through degenerate love . What is commonly,but improperly, called love is either pagan fondnessor Simon-pure egotism and self-love .When a vain person looks into a mirror, she (if

it be a “she” ) will immediately fall in love with theimage

,because it is an image o f herself. And a selfish

parent sees in his child,not another being, but himself,

and he loves it for himself. His affection is not anact o f generosity , a s it should be , but an act o f selfindulgence . He does n ot seek to please another, heseeks to please himself. His love , therefore , is nothing but concentrated vanity— and that is the wrongkind .

Such a parent will neglect a less favored child .

and he will so far dote o n the corporal and physicalobj ect o f his devotion as to forget there is a soul

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

194 M ORAL BRIEFS.

supreme rights of God in the premises . Since truelove seeks to do good, in parents it should first neverlose sight o f the child’s soul and the means to helphim save it. Without this all else is labor lost . Godfrowns on such unchristian affection, a nd He usuallysees to it that, even in this world the reaping be according to the sowing.

The rearing o f a child is the making o r unmakingo f a man or woman . Love is the motive power behindthis enterprise . That is why we insist on the disinterestedn ess o f parental love , before touching on the allimportant question o f education.

CHAPTER LXI .

EDUCATE THE CHILDREN .

BEFORE reaching the age o f reason , the child’s

needs are purely animal ; it requires to be fed , clothedand provided with the general necessities o f life .Every child has a natural right that its young life befostered and protected ; the giver must preserve hisgift

,otherwise his gift is vain. To neglect this duty

is a sin,not precisely against the fourth, but rather

against the fifth,commandment which treats of killing

and kindred acts .When the mind begins to open and the reason

ing faculties to develop,the duty of educating the

child becomes incumbent on the parent. As itsphysical

,so its intellectual

,being must be trained and

nourished . And by education is here meant thetraining of the young mind

,the bringing out of its

mental powers and the acquisition o f useful knowledge , without reference to anything moral or religious . This latter feature— the most important ofall deserves especial attention .

EDUCATE THE CH ILDREN . 19 5

Concerning the culture o f the mind, it is a fact ,recognized by all

,that in this era o f popular rights

and liberties,no man can expect to make anything

but a meagre success of life, if he does that much ,without at least a modicum of knowledge and intellectual training. This is an age in which brains areat a high premium ; and although brains a re by nomeans the monopoly of the cultured class , they mustbe considered as non-existent if they are not broughtout by education . Knowledge is what counts n ow

adays . Even in the most common walks o f lifeadvancement is impossible without it. This is onereason why parents

,who have at heart the future

success and well-being of their children , should striveto give them as good an education as their meansallow .

Their happiness here is also concerned. If hebe ignorant and untaught, a man will be frownedat, laughed a t

,and be made in many ways , in contact

with his fellow-men, to feel the overwhelming

inferiority o f his position . He will be made unhappy,unless he chooses to keep out o f the way o f thosewho know something and associate with those whoknow nothing— ih which case he is very liable tofeel lonesome .He is moreover deprived o f the positive comforts

and happiness that education affords . Neither booksnor public questions will interest him ; his leisuremoments will be a time o f idleness and unbearabletedium a whole world— the world o f the mind— willbe closed to him, with its joys , pleasures and comforts which are many.

Add to this the fact tha t the Maker never intendedthat

. the noble faculty o f the intelligence Shouldr emaIn an inert element in the life o f His creature ,that this precious talent Should remain buried in theflesh of animal nature . Intelligence alone distingu ishes us from the brute ; we are under obligationto perfect our humanity. And since education is a

196 M ORAL BRIEFS.

means o f doing this, we owe it to our na ture that weeducate ourselves and have educated those who areunder ou r care .

How long should the child be kept at school'The law provides that every child attend school untilit reaches the age o f fourteen . This law appears tobe reasonable and just, and we think that in ordinarycircumstances it has the power to bind in conscience

.

The parent therefore who neglects to keep childrenat school we account guilty o f sin

,and o f grievous

Sin, if the neglect be notable .Outside this provision of the law

,we think

children should be kept at school as long as it is possible and prudent to do so . This depends

,of course

,

on the means and resources o f the parents . They areunder no obligation to give to their children a n education above what their means allow . Then

,the apti

tudes , physical and mental , of the child are a factorto be considered. Poor health o r inherited weaknessmay forbid a too close application to studies

,while

it may be a pure waste o f time and money to keepat school a child that will n ot profit by the advantageoffered . It is better to put such a child at work asSoon as possible . As says the philosopher of ArcheyRoad '“You may lead a young man to the university,but you cannot make him learn .

”

Outside these contingencies , we think every childhas a right to a common school education , such asis given in ou r system under the high school , whetherit be fourteen years o f age or over. Reading andwriting

,grammar and arithmetic , history and

geography, these ar e the fundamental and essentialelements of a common school education ; and in ou r

time and country,a modicum o f information on these

subjects is necessary fo r the future well-being, successand happiness o f ou r children . And since parentsare bound to care fo r the future o f their children, weconsider them likewise bound to give them such aneducation as will insure these blessings .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

198 M ORAL BRIEFS.

gain their livelihood with their hands and eyes andears , and not solely with their brains ; they thereforerequire the most practical education imaginable . Theyneed intellectual tools to work with, and not a smattering o f science, botany, drawing and politicalphilosophy to forget as soon as possible . Pureculture studies are not a practical ga in for them ,

while the time consumed in pursuing these is so muchtaken away from a thorough training in the essentials . Lectures o n science , elementary experiments inchemistry

,kindergarten instructions in water color

painting, these are as much in their place in theeducation o f the average child as an ivory-handledgold pen in the hand that wields the pick-ax .

A boy is better off learning a trade than cramminghis head full o f culture fads ; he is then doing something useful and profitable on which the happinessand success o f his life will depend . By the time hiscompanions have done dabbling in science and havecome to the conclusion that they are simply beingshown how ignorant they are— not a very consolingconclusion after all— he will have already laid the

foundation of his career and be earning enough tosettle down in life . He may not be able to talk o n

an infinity o f subjects about which he knows nothingat all, but he will be able to earn his own living,which is something worth While .

If the free high school were more of a businessschool , people would get better returns for theirmoney . True , some would then be obliged to payfo r the expensive fads that would be done away with ;but since they alone enj oy these things

,why should

others be made to pay for them who cannot enjoythem ' Why should the poor be taxed to educate therich ' Why not give the poor full va lue fo r theirshare of the burden' Why not provide them withintellectual tools that suit their condition, j ust as therich are being provided for in the present system'The parochial high school has , in several places

EDUCATIONAL EXTRAVAGANCE . 199

we know o f,been made to serve as a protest against

such evils and as an example that has already beenfollowed in more than o n e instance by the publicschools . Intelligent and energetic pastors , knowingfull well the conditions and needs o f their people ,offer the children a course in business methods asbeing more suitable

,more profitable and less extrav

agan t than four years spent in acquiring a smatteringo f what they will never possess thoroughly and neverneed in their callings in life . It is better to fill youngminds with the useful than with the agreeable , whenit is impossible to furnish both . Results alreadybespeak the wisdom o f this plan and reflect no smallhonor on its originators .Parents therefore should see to it that their

children get the kind o f education they need , the kindthat will serve them best in after life . They shouldnot allow the precious time o f youth to be whiledaway in tr ifles and vanities . Children have a rightto be educated in a manner in keeping with theirconditions in life

,and it is criminal in parents to

neglect the real needs of their children while tryingto fit them fo r positions they will never occupy .

In the meantime , let them protest against theextravagance o f educational enthusiasts and excessiveState paternalism . Let them ask that the burden ofculture studies be put where it belongs

,that is

, o n theshoulders o f those who are the sole beneficiaries ; andthat free popular education be made popular, that is ,fo r all , and not for an elite o f society. The publicschool system was called into existence to do on e

work, namely, to educate the masses ' it was neverintended to furnish a college education for the benefit o f the rich men’s sons at the expense o f the poor.As it stands to -day

,it is an unadulterated

extravagance.

CHAPTER LXIII .

GODLESS EDUCATION.

TH E other defect, respecting education as foundin the public schools o f the land, is that it leaves thesoul out of all consideration and relegates the ideao f God to a background of Silent contempt . On thissubject we can do no better than quote wisdom fromthe Fathers of the Third Plenary Council o f

Baltimore .“Few

,if any

,will deny that a sound civilization

must depend upon sound popular education . Buteducation

,in order to be sound and to produce

beneficial results,must develop what is best in man ,

a n d make him n ot only clever, but good . A o n e-Sidededucation will develop a o n e-Sided life ; and such alife will surely topple over

,and so will every social

system that is built up o f such lives . True civilization requires that not only the physical and intellectual

,but a lso the moral and religious , well-being o f

the people should be improved, and at least withequal care .

It cannot be desirable or advantageous thatreligion should be excluded from the school . On thecontrary, it ought to be there one o f the chief agenciesfo r moulding the young life to all that is true andvirtuous , and holy. To Shut religion out O f theschool , and keep it fo r home and the Church , is,logically

, to train up a generation that will considerreligion good for home and the Church

,but not for

the practical business of real life . A life is notdwarfed

,but ennobled, by being lived in the presence

o f God .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

202 M ORAL BRIEFS.

The most substantial protest the Catholic Churchoffers against godless education is the system o f herparochial schools ; and this alone is sufficient to givean idea o f the importance of this question . Fromheadquarters comes the order to erect Catholic schoolsin every parish in this land as soon as the thing canbe done. This means a tremendous amount o f work ,and a tremendous expense . It means a competitiono n educational grounds with the greatest, richest andmost powerful nation in the world . The game mustbe worth the candle ; there must be some proportionbetween the end and the means .The Catholic Church has the wisdom of ages to

learn from ; and when she embarks on an enterpriseo f this kind, even her bitterest enemies can afford totake it for granted that there is something behind it .And there is . There is her very life , which dependso n the fidelity of her children . And her childrenare lost to her and to God unless she fosters religionin her young. Let parents Share this solicitude o f

the Church for the little ones, and beware o f the

dangers o f the godless school .

CHAPTER LXIV .

CATHOLIC SCHOOLS .

TH E Catholic school system allover this land hasbeen erected and stands dedicated to the principle thatno child can be properly

,thoroughly and profitably

— for itself— educated , whose soul is not fed withreligion and morality while its intelligence is beingstocked with learning and knowledge . It is intended

,

and made, to avoid the two defects under which ourpublic school system labors— the o n e accidental

,the

CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. 203

other fundamental— namely, extravagance a n d god

lessness . The child is taught the things that arenecessary fo r it to know ; catechism and religion takethe place o f fads and costly frills .The Catholic school does not lay claim to

superiority over another on purely secular lines,

although in many cases its superiority is a very pa tentfact ; it repudiates and denies charges to the effectthat it is inferior

,although this may be found in some

cases to be true . It contends that it is equal to, asgood as

,any other ; and there is no evidence why

this should n ot be so . But it does pretend to givea more thorough e duca tion in the true sense o f theword

,if education really means a bringing out o f

that which is best in ou r nature .Neither do we hold that such a training as our

schools provide will assure the faith and salvation o f

the children confided to ou r care . Neither church ,n o r religion , nor prayer , nor grace , nor God Himselfwill do this alone . The child’s fidelity to God and itsultimate reward depends o n that child’s efforts andwill , which nothing can supply . But what we doguarantee is that the child will be furnished withwhat is necessary to keep the faith and save its soul

,

that there will be no o n e to blame but itself if it fails,

and that such security it will not find outside theCatholic school . It is fo r j ust such work that theschool is equipped , that is the only reason fo r itsexistence , and we are not by any means preparedto confess that ou r system is a failure in that featurewhich is its essential one.

That every Catholic child has an inherent rightto such a tra ining, it is n o t for on e moment permittedto doubt ; there is nothing outside the very bread thatkeeps its body and soul together to which it has abetter right. Intellectual training is a very secondarymatter when the immortal soul is concerned . And ifthe child has this right

,there is a corresponding duty

m the parent to provide it with such ; and since that

204 M ORAL BRIEFS.

right is ina lienable, that duty is of the gravest . Henceit follows that parents who neglect the opportunitythey enj oy of providing their Offspring with a soundreligious and moral training in youth

,and expose

them,unprepared , to the attacks , covert and Open,

o f modern indifferentism , while pursuing secularstudies

,display a woeful ignorance O f their obligations

and responsibilities .This natural right Of the child to a religious

education,and the authority o f the Church which

speaks in n o uncertain accents on the subj ect go tomake a general law that imposes a moral Obligationupon parents to send their children to Catholic schools .Parents who fail in this simply do wrong, and inmany cases cannot be excused from morta l Offending.

And it requires,according to the general opinion , a

very serious reason to justify non-compliance withthis law .

Exaggeration,Of course

,never serves any

purpose ; but when we consider the personal rights Ofchildren to have their spiritual life well nurtured ,an d the general evils against which this system o f

education has been judged necessary to make theChurch secure

,it will be easily seen that there is little

fear o f over-estimating the importance o f the questionand the gravity Of the obligations under whichparents are placed .

Moreover,disregard for this general law o n the

part o f parents involves contempt o f authority,which

contempt, by reason O f its being public, cannot escapethe malice of scandal . Even when the early religiouseducation of the child is safeguarded by excellenthome training and example and no evil effects ofpurely secular education are to be feared, the factOf Open resistance to the direction of Church authorityis an evil in itself ; and may be the cause of leadingothers in the same path O f revolt— others who haven ot like circumstances in their favor .

About the only person I know who might be

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

206 M ORAL BRIEFS.

misfortune in many cases, handicapping them in therace o f life . It is well , therefore , n ot to claim too

much for ou r schools . We concede the point.Another parent thinks that because he went

through the public schools and kept the faith in hisday, his children may be trusted to do the same. Thisobj ection has a serious front to it. It does seemstrange that children should not wa lk in the footstepsOf their worthy parents ; but the fact is, and facts arestubborn things

,the fact is that they do not always

act thus . And they might tell you, to justify theirunseemly conduct, that the conditions that obtainedin life in Olden days are not the same as at present ;that there were no parochial schools then to offer achoice in matters o f education and that kind Providencemight have taken this into consideration ' that it wasthe custom in those days for children to imitate therugged virtues Of their parents struggling againstnecessity o n o n e hand and bigotry on the other ; butthat through the powerful influence Of money, theprogeny of the persecuted may now hobnob wi th theprogeny O f the bigot, and the association is n ot alwaysthe best thing in the world for the faith and religiousconvictions o f the former, unless these convictionsare well grounded in youth . The parent thereforewho kept the faith with less had a very considerableadvantage over his child who apparently has moreprivileges , but also more temptations and dangers .The Objection does not look so serious now .

Of course there is the question o f social standing—a very important matter with some parents o f thenouveau riche” type . A fop will gauge a man’sworth by the size of his purse o r the style and cut o fthe coat he wears . There a re parents who would notmind their children’s sitting beside a little darkey

,

but who do Object most strenuously to their occupyingthe same bench with a dirty little Irish child . Acalico dress o r a coat frayed at the edges are certainlynot badges Of high social standing, but they are n ot

TH E CATHOLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM . 207

incompatible with honesty, purity, industry and respectfo r God, which things crea te a wholesome atmosphereto live in and make the world better in every senseo f the word . There is n o refinement in these littleones, to speak o f, n ot even the refinement O f vice .There is something in the air they breathe that killsthe germ of vice . The discipline considers sin a worseevil than ignorance o f social amenities , and virtueand goodness as far superior to etiquette anddistinction o f manners . If a different appreciation ofthings is entertained, we grant the inferiority Of ou rschools .

“But then,it is so very un -American, you know ,

to maintain separate schools in opposition to aninstitution so intensely American as ou r public schoolsystem . This state o f affairs

,fosters creed prejudices

that it is the duty o f every true American to helpdestroy . The age Of religious differences is past, andthe parochial school is a perpetual reminder of thingsO f the past that were best forgotten .

”

We deny that the system that stands fo r no religion s o r moral training is intensely American . This is aChristian land . If our denial cannot be sustained, weconsider such a system radically wrong and detr imental to the best interests o f the country ; and weprotest against it, j ust as some o f us protest againstimperialism , high tariff and monometalism . It iswrong, bad, therefore un -American .

We a lso claim that the Protestant propagandathat is being carried o n under the guise of non-sectarianeducation is unspeakably unjust and outrageous .Protestantism is n ot a State institution in this country.

A stranger might think so by the way public shekelsare made to serve the purposes O f proselytism ; butto make the claim , in theory , o r in practise, is to gocounter to the laws of this land

,and is un -American

to a degree . That is another un -Americanism weprotest against .We teach truth , n ot creed prejudices ; we train

208 M ORAL BRIEFS.

our children to have and always maintain a strongprejudice for religious truth, and that kind Ofprejudice is the rock-bed of all that is good an d holyand worth living fo r . We teach dogma . We do notbelieve in religion without dogma, any more thanreligion without truth .

“That kind Of religion hasnot been invented, but it will come in when we havegood men without convictions

,parties without

principles and geometry without theories .”

If there is anything un -American in all this,it

is because the term is misunderstood and misapplied .

We a r e sorry if others find us at Odds o n religiousgrounds . The fact O f our existence will always be areminder O f our differences with them in the past .But we are not willing to cease to exist o n thataccount.

CHAPTER LXVI .

CORRECTION .

AM ONG the many things that are good forchildren and that parents are in duty bound to supplyis— the rod ' This may sound old-fashioned, and itunfortuna tely is ; there is a new school of homediscipline in vogue nowadays .

S lippers have outgrown their usefulness as

implements o f persuasion, being now employedexclusively as foot-gear . The lissom birch thrivesungarnered in the thicket

,where grace an d gentleness

supply the whilom vigor of its sway . The unyieldingbarrel-stave , that formerly occupied a place o f honorand convenience in the household is now relegated

,a

harmless thing, to a forgotten corner o f the cellar,

and no longer points a moral but adorns a wood-pile .

Disciplinary applications o f the Old type have fallen

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 10 M ORAL BRIEFS.

the wrong path ; and the habits acquired in youth,the faults developed he will carry through life to hisown and the misery Of others . He therefore requirestraining and a substitute for j udgment ; and a ccordingto the Holy Ghost, the rod furnishes both . In themaj ority Of cases nothing can supply it.This theory has held good in all the ages o f the

world , and unless the species has“evolved” by

extraordinary leaps and bounds within the last fiftyyears , it holds good to-day, modern nursery milk-andhoney discipline to the contrary notwithstanding . Itmay be hard on the youngster— fit was hard on usbut the difficulty is only temporary ; and difficulty,some genius has said, is the nurse o f greatness , aharsh nurse, who roughly rocks her foster-childreninto strength and athletic proportions .The great point is that this treatment be given

in time , when it is possible to administer it withsuccess and fruit . The ordinary child does n ot needoft-repeated doses ; a firm hand and a vigorous application go a long way, in most cases . Half-hearted ,milk-and-water castigation

,like physic

,should be

thrown to the dogs . Long threatenings spoil theoperation ; they betray weakness which the child isthe first to discover . And without being brutal , it iswell that the chastisement be such as will lingersomewhat longer in the memory than in the sensibility .

The defects that deserve this corrective especiallyare insubordination

,sulkiness and sullenness ; it is

good to stir up the lazy ; it is necessary to instil in thechild’s mind a saving sense o f its own inferiority andto inculcate lessons Of humility , self-effacement andself-denial . It should scourge dishonesty and lying.

The bear licks its cub into shape ; let the parent goto the bear

,inquire o f its ways and be wise . His

children will then have a moral shape and a formo f character that will stand them in good stead in afterlife ; and they will give thanks in proportion to thepain inflicted during the process Of formation .

CHAPTER LXVII .

JUSTICE AND RIGHTS .

JUSTICE is a virtue by which we render unto everyman that which to him is due . Among equals

,it

is called commutative j ustice, the which a lone is herein question . It protects us in the enj oyment Of ourown rights , and imposes upon us the Obligation o f

respecting the rights of ou r fellow-men . This, o f

course , supposes that we have certain rights and thatwe know what a right is . But what is a right'The word itself may be clearer in the minds of

many than its definition ; few ignore what a right is ,and fewer still perhaps could say clearly and correctlywhat they mean by the word . A right is n ot something that you can see and feel and smell ' it is amoral faculty

,that is

,a recognized, inviolable power

o r liberty to do something, to hold o r obtain possessionOf something. Where the right O f property isconcerned , it supposes a certain relation o r connectionbetween a person and an Obj ect ; this may be a relationOf natural possession

,as in the case o f life o r

reputation,a relation o f lawful acquisition , as that

of the goods Of life , etc . Out of this relation springsa title , j ust and proper, by

‘

which I may call thatObj ect mine ,

” or you,

“yours ownership is therebyestablished Of the Object and conceded to the party inquestion . This party is therefore said to have a rightto the Object and the right is good

,whether he is in

possession o r not thereof . Justice respects this right ,respects the just claims and titles Of the owner

,and

forbids every act injurious thereto.

All this pre-supposes the idea o f God, and withoutthat idea, there can be no justice and no rights ,

2 I 2 1\IORAL BRIEFS.

properly so -called . Justice is based on the conformityo f all things with the will Of God. The will o f Godis that we attain to everlasting happiness in the nextworld through the means Of an established order o f

things in this life . This world is so ruled, and ournature is such

,that certain means a re either absolutely

o r relatively necessary for the attaining o f that end 'for example , life, reputation, liberty, the pursuit ofhappiness in the measure Of o u r lawful capacity . Theobligation therefore to reach that end gives us theright to use these means ; and God places in everysoul the virtue of justice so that this right may berespected .

But it must be understood that the rights o f Godtowards us transcend all other rights that we mayhave towa rds our fellow-men ; ours we enjoy underthe high dominion o f Him who grants all rights .Consequently , in the pursuit o f j ustice for ourselves ,o u r rights cease the moment they come intoantagonism with the superior rights O f God as foundin His L aw . NO man has a right to do what is evil ,not even to preserve that most inalienable and sacredo f all rights , his right to life . To deny this is todestroy the very notion O f justice ; the restrictions Ofo ur rights are more sacred than those rightsthemselves .

Violation o f rights among equals is calledinjustice . This sin has a triple malice ; it attacks theliberty O f fellow-men and destroys it ; it a ttacks theorder o f the world and the basis of society ; it attacksthe decree and mandate Of the Almighty who willsthat this world shall be run o n the plan o f justice .Injustice is therefore directly a sin against man

,and

indirectly a crime against God .

SO j ealous is God Of the rights of His creaturesthat He never remains satisfied until full j ustice isdone for every act Of injustice . Charity may bewounded

,and the fault condon ed ; but only reparation

in kind will satisfy justice . Whatever is mine is mine ,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 14 M ORAL BRIEFS.

well as of men . When a man slays a man,he slays

an equal ; when he kills an animal , he kills a creaturemade to serve him and to be his food ; and raw meatis not always palatable, and to cook is to kill .“Everything that moves and lives , says Holy Writ,shall be unto you as food .

”

The killing therefore herein question is the takingo f human life, o r homicide . There can be no doubtbut that life is man’s best and most precious possession ,and that he has an inborn right to live as long asn ature’s laws Operate in his favor . But man is notmaster of that gift Of life

,either in himself or in

others . God, who alone can give , alone may take itaway. Sole master of life, He deals it out to Hiscreatures as it pleases Him ; and whoever tamperswith human life intrudes upon the domain O f theDivinity

,violating at the some time the first right O f

his fellow-man .

We have an instinctive horror of blood, humanblood . F o r the ordinary individual the Mosaicenactment that forbids murder is almost superfluous ,so deeply has nature graven o n ou r hearts the letterof that law . Murder is abominable

,for the very reason

that life is precious ; and no reasonable being, civilizedor savage, dealing death unjustly unto a fellow-man,can have any other conviction in his soul than that he iscommitting a crime an d incurring the almighty wrathof the Deity. If such killing is done by a responsibleagent, and against the right O f the victim,

the crimecommitted is murder or unjustifiable homicide .Which supposes that there is a kind of homicide

that is justifiable , in seeming contradiction o f thegeneral law O f God a n d nature, which specifies noexception . But there is a question here less Ofexception than O f distinction . The law is a generalone

,o f vast comprehension . Is all killing prohibited '

Evidently no . It is limited to human beings, in thefirst place ; to responsible agents , in the next ; andthirdly

,it involves a question o f injustice. What is

HOM ICIDE. 2 1 5

forbidden is the voluntary and unj ust killing of ahuman being. Having thus specified according to therules o f right reasoning, we find we have a considerablemargin left for the taking Of life that is j ustifiable .And the records Of Divine revelation will approve thefindings o f right reason .

We find God in the Old Law,while upholding

His fifth precept, commanding capital punishment andsanctioning the slaughter Of war ; He not onlyapproved the slaying O f certain persons

, 1 . .t there areinstances of His giving authority to kill . By so doingHe delegated His supreme right over life to Hiscreatures . “Whoever sheds human blood

,let his blood

be shed .

” In the New Testament the officer Of the lawis called the minister Of God and is said not withoutcause to carry the sword ; and the sword is the symbolo f the power to inflict death .

The presence of such laws as that o f capital

pun shmen t, o f war and o f self-defense, in all the writtencodes of civilized peoples

,as well as in the unwritten

codes of savage tribes,can be accounted for only by

a direct o r indirect commission from the Deity . Alegal tradition so universal and so constant is a naturallaw , and consequently a divine law . In a matter o fsuch importance all mankind could not have erred ;if it has , it is perfectly safe to be with it in itserror .These exceptions

,if we may call them exceptions ,

suppose the victim to have forfeited his right to live ,to have placed himself in a position Of unjustaggression , which aggression gives to the partyattacked the right to repel it

,to protect his own life

even at the cost o f the life o f the unjust aggressor .This is an individual privilege in Only o n e instance ,that Of self-defence ; in all others it is invested in thebody politic o r society which alone can declare warand inflict death o n a capital Offender .

Of course it may be said that in moral matters,

like does not cure like,that to permit killing is a

2 16 M ORAL BRIEFS.

strange manner o f discouraging the same . But thismeasure acts as a deterrent ; it is n o t a cure for theOffender, o r rather it is, and a radical one ; it isintended to instil a salutary dread into the hearts Ofthose who may be inclined to play too freely withhuman life . This is the only argument assassinsunderstand ; it is therefore the only one we can useagainst them .

CHAPTER LXIX .

IS SUICIDE A SIN'

MOST people no doubt remember how, a shorttime previous to his death

,Col . Robert Ingersoll , the

agnostic lecturer,gave o ut a thesis with the above

title,Offering a negative conclusion . Some discussion

in sued in public print ; the question was debated hotly,and whole columns o f pros and cons were inflicted o n

the suffering public by the theologues who had takenthe matter seriously .

We recall,to o , how ,

in the height Of the discussion ,a poor devil of an unfortunate was found ino n e O f the parks Of the Metropolis with an emptypistol in his clinched fist, a bullet in his head and inhis pocket a copy o f the thesis ' Is suicide a sin '

TO a Christian , this theorizing and speculation waslaughable enough ; but when one was brought face toface with the reality of the thing

,a grim humor was

added to the situation . Comedy is dangerous thatleads to tragedy.

The witty part Of the matter was this ' Ingersollspoke Of sin . Now

,what kind Of an intelligible thin g

could sin be in the mind O f a blasphemous agnostic '

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 18 M ORAL BRIEFS.

take it away . Destruction supposes an authority anddominion that does not belong to any man where lifeis concerned . And he who a ssumes such a prerogativecommits an act o f unquestionable injustice againstHim whose authority is usurped .

By indirect killing we mean the placing of an act,

good or at least morally indifferent,from which may

result a benefit that is intended,but also an evil— death

“ which is not intended but simply suffered to occur.In this event there is no sin

,provided there be suffi

cient reason for permitting said evil effect. The actmay be an Operation , the benefit intended, a cure ; theevil risked

,death . The misery o f ill health is a suffi

cient reason for risking the evil O f death in the hope Ofregaining strength a n d health . To escape sure death ,to escape from grave danger o r ills , to preserve one

’svirtue

,to save another’s life

,to assure a great public

benefit, etc . , these are reasons proportionate to the evilO f risking life ; and in these and similar cases , if deathresults , it is indirect suicide , and is in nowise crimina l .The same cannot be said o f death that results from

abuses o r excesses o f any kind,such as dissipation o r

debauchery ; from risks that are taken in a spirit O fbravado o r with a view to winning fame o r

'

lucre.F o r a still better reason this cannot be said of thosewho undergo criminal operations 'it is never permittedto do what is intrinsically evil that good may cometherefrom .

All this applies to self-mutilation as well as toself-destruction ; as parts of the whole, one

’s limbsshould be the Obj ects o f one’s charity , and God

’s lawdemands that we preserve them as well as the bodyitself. It is lawful to submit to the maiming processonly when the utility Of the whole body demands it ;otherwise it is criminal .

One word more . What about those who call upon ,and desire death 'TO desire evil is sinful . Yes , butdeath is a moral evil when its mode is contrary to thelaws o f God and o f n ature . Thus , with perfect

Is SUICIDE A SIN ' 2 19

acquiescence to order Of Divine Providence,if o n e

desire death in order to be at rest with God, that o n edesires a good and meritorious thing and with perfectregularity ; it is less meritorious to desire death withthe sole view o f escaping the ills and troubles Of life ;it would even be difficult to convict one Of mortalOffending if he desired death for a Slight an d futilereason

,if there be due respect for the will Of God .

The sin O f such desires consists in rebellion againstthe divine Will and opposition to the providence o f

God ; in such cases the sin is never anything butgrievous .

CHAPTER LXX .

SELF-DEFENSE .

TH E thought is a terrible o n e— and the act isdesperate in itself— O f a man , however justified hisconduct may be , slaying with his own hand a fellowbeing and sending his soul , unprepared perhaps , beforeits Maker. But it is a still more desperate thing,because it strikes us nearer home , to yield up one

’s lifeinto the hands o f an agent o f inj ustice . There is herean

'

alternative o f two ve ry great evils ; it is a questiono f two lives , his and mine ; I must slay o r I must diewithout having done anything to forfeit my life .But the law of charity

,founded in nature

,makes

my life more precious to me than his,for charity begins

at home . Then, to save his life , I must give mine ;and he risks his to take mine ' I do not desire to killmy unjust aggressor , but I do intend , as I have aperfect right, to protect my own life . If he

,without

220 M ORAL BRIEFS.

cause , places his existence as an Obstacle to my enjoyment o f life , then I shall remove that Obstacle, and todo it, I shall kill . Again

,a desperate remedy

,but

the situation is most terribly desperate . Being givenlaw o f my being

,I can not help the inevitable result

o f conditions O f which I am nowise responsible . Theman who attacks my life places his own beyond thepossibility Of my saving it .

This , o f course , supposes a man using the fullmeasure o f his rights . But is he bound to do this ,morally ' Not if his charity for another be greaterthan that which he bears towards himself, if he gobeyond the divine injunction to love his neighbor as himself and love him better than himself ; if he feel that he is better prepared to meethis God than the other, if he have no on e dependento n him for maintenance and support. Even did hehappen to be in the state of mortal sin, there is everyreason to believe that such charity as will sacrificelife fo r another, greater than which no man has , wouldwash away that sin and Open the way of mercy ; whilegreat indeed must be the necessity Of the dependentones to require absolutely the death of another.The aggression that justifies killing must be

unjust. This would n ot be the case Of a criminal beingbrought to justice o r resisting arrest . Justice cannotconflict with itself and can do nothing unjust incarrying out its own mandates . The culprit thereforehas no grounds to stand upon for his defense .

Neither is killing justifiable,if wounding o r

mutilation would effect the purpose . But here thecode of mo rals allows much latitude on account o f thedifficulty o f judging to a nicety the intentions O f theaggressor , that is , whether he means to kill or not ;and of so directing the protecting blow as to inflictjust enough , and no more disability than the occasionrequires .

Virtue in woman is rightly considered a boongreater than life ; and for that matter, so is the state of

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER LXXI .

MURDER OFTEN SANCTIONED .

A L L inj ury done to another in order to repair aninsult is criminal, and if said inj ury result in death,it is murder.Here we consider an insult as an a ttack o n one’s

reputation o r character, a charge or accusation, aslurring remark , etc . , without reference to the trutho r falsity thereof. It may be obj ected that whereasreputation, like chastity and considerable possessions ,i s Often valued as high as life itself

,the same right

exists to defend it even at the cost o f another’s life .But it must be remembered that the loss Of charactersustained in consequence Of an insult Of this kind issomething very ephemeral and unsubstantial ; and onlyto a mind abnormally sensitive can any proportion beperceived between the loss and the remedy . This isespecially true when the attack is in words and goesno farther than words ' for “sticks and stones willbreak your bones

,but names will never hurt you ,

”as

we used to say when we were boys . Then, words aresuch fleeting things that the harm is done , whateverha rm there is , before any remedy can be brought tobear upon it ; which fact leaves no room for selfdefense .In such a case, the only redress that can be had

is from the courts O f j ustice, established to undowrongs as far as the thing can be done . The powerto do this belongs to the State alone

,and is vested

in no private individual . TO assume the prerogativeOf privately doing oneself justice

,when recourse can

be had to the tribunals Of justice,is to sin , and every

act committed in this pursuit o f justice is unlawfula nd criminal .

M URDER OFTEN SANCTIONED. 223

This applies likewise to all the other cases ofself-defense wherein life, virtue a n d wealth are con

cerned, if the harm is already done, o r if legal

measures can prevent the evil, o r undo it. It maybe that the justice dealt out by the tribunal

,in case

o f injury being done to us , prove inferior to thatwhich we might have Obta ined ourselves by privatemethods . But this is not a reason fo r o n e to takethe law into one’s own hands . Such loss is accidentaland must be ascribed to the inevitable course Of humanthings .Duelling is a form Of murder and suicide com

bin ed, for which there can possibly be n o j ustification .

The code o f honor that requires the reparation o f

an insult at the point o f the sword or the muzzle Ofa pistol has n o existence outside the befogged intelligen ce o f godless men . The duel repairs nothingand aggravates the evil it seeks to remedy. Thejustice it appeals to is a creature dependent o n skilland luck ; such justice is not only blind, but crazyas well .That is why the Church anathematizes duelling.

The duel she condemns is a hand-to-hand combatprearranged as to weapons , time and place, and itis immaterial whether it be to the death o r only tothe letting O f first blood . She fulminates her majorexcommunication aga inst duellists , even in the evento f their failing to keep their agreement. Her sentence affects seconds and all those who advise orfavor o r abet, and even those whose simple presenceis an incentive and encouragement. She refusesChristian buria l to the one who falls, unless beforedying he shows certain dispositions Of repentance .Prize fighting, however brutal and degrading ,

must n ot be put in the category o f duelling. Its Obj ectis not to wipe out an insult

,but to furnish sport and to

reap the incidental profits . In normal conditions thereis no danger to life o r limb . Sharkey might stop withthe point O f his chin a blow that would send many

2 24 M ORAL BRIEFS.

another into kingdom come ; but so long as Sharkeydoes the stopping the danger remains non-existent. If,however, hate instead o f lucre bring the men together,that motive would be sufficient to make the game oneof blood if not Of death .

Lynching, is another kind o f murder,and a

cowardly, brutal kind, at that . N0 crime , n o abomin ation on the part of the victim, however great, canjustify such an inhuman proceeding . It brands withthe crime o f wilful murder every man o r woman whohas a hand in it. To defend the theory O f lynchingis as bad as to carry it out in practice . And it isgreatly to be feared that the Almighty will o n e daycall this land to account for the outrageous performan ces of unbridled license and heartless cruelty thatOccur so frequently in our midst .The only plea o n which to ground an excuse for suchexhibitions o f brutality and disrespect for order andjustice would be the inability o f established governmentto mete out j ustice to the guilty ; but this is not eventhe case

, fo r government is defied and lawful authoritycapable and willing to punish is spurned ; the culpritis taken from the hands of the law and deliveredover to the vengeance of a mob . However popularthe doctrine o f Judge Lynch may be in certain sections o f the land , it is nevertheless reprobated by thelaw o f God and stands condemned at the bar o f Hisjustice .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

226 M ORAL BRIEFS.

of man’

s making, but rather an act o f God, like ea rthquakes, volcanic eruptions and the like ; which thingsHe uses as flails to chastise His people

,or to bring

them to a sense o f their own in sign ifican ce in His sight.Be this as it may, it is nevertheless true that a privateindividua l is rarely, if ever, competent to judge rightlyby himself o f the morality o f any given cause

,until

such time at least as history has probed the matterand brought every evidence to light. In case, therefore, o f doubt, every presumption should favor thecause o f one’s own country. If, in my private Opinion,the cause of my country is doubtfully wrong, thenthat doubt Should yield to the weight o f higherauthoritative opinion . Officia l or popular judgmentwill be authority for me ; on that authority I may forma strong probable opinion , at least ; a nd this willassure the morality Of my taking up my country

’scause , even though it be doubtful from my personalpoint Of view . If this cannot be done and one

’

s conscience positively reprove such a cause , then that On ecannot

,until a contrary conviction is acquired, take

a n y part therein . But he is in no wise bound todefend with arms the other side, for his convictionsare subj ective and general laws do n ot take theseinto account.Who are bound to serve'That depends on the

quality o f danger to which the commonwealth is exposed .

First,the obligation is for those who can do

so easily ; young men, strong, unmarried , with a tastefor such adventure a s war affords . The greater thegeneral peril

,the less private needs should be con

sidered. The situation may be such as to call forthevery able-bodied man , irrespective Of family mecessities . TO Shirk this duty when it is plainly a duty- a rare circumstance

,indeed— is without doubt a sin.

Obedience to orders is the alpha and omega Ofarmy disclipin e ; without it a Cause is losf from thebeginning. Numbers are nothing compared to order ;a mob is not a fighting machine ; it is only a fair

ON THE ETH ICS OF WAR. 227

target. The issue o f a battle, o r even of a whole war,may depend o n obedience to orders . Army men knowthis so well tha t death is not infrequently the penaltyo f disobedience . Consequently, a violation o f dis 'ciplin e is usually a serious Offense ; it may easily be amortal sin .

War being slaughter, the soldier’s business is to

kill o r rather to disable , as many o f the enemy as possible o n the field O f battle. This disabling processmeans , of course, and necessa rily, the maiming untodeath Of many. Such killing is not only lawful , butObligatory. War, like the surgeon

’s knife, must Oftenlop O ff much in order to save the whole . The bestsoldier is he who inflicts most damage on the enemy.

But the desire and intention o f the soldier shouldn ot be primarily to kill, but only to put the enemybeyond the possibility Of doing further harm . Deathwill be the result o f his efforts in many cases , and thishe suffers to occur rather than desires and intends .He has n o right to slay outside Of ba ttle or withoutthe express command Of a superior Officer ; if he doesso , he is guilty of murder. Neither must there behate behind the aim that singles out a foe fo r

destruction ; the general hatred which he bestows onthe opposing cause must respect the individual enemy.

It is not lawful to wantonly torture o r maim anenemy, whoever o r whatever he may be, however greathis crime . Not even the express command o f asuperior Officer can justify such doings

,because it is

barbarity, pure and unmitigated . In war these thingsare morally just what they would be if they wereperpetrated in the heart Of peace and civilization by agang O f thugs . These are abominations that

,not only

di sgrace the flag under which they are committed,but

even cry to Heaven for vengeance.

CHAPTER LXXIII .

THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS .

HEROD,the Bloody, slew all under two . A modern

Moloch, a creature Of lust and blood, disguised Oftenunder the cloak o f respectability, stalks through aChristian land denying the babe the right to be bornat all , demanding that it be crushed as soon as conceived. There is murder and murder ; but this is themost heartless , cowardly and brutal on the catalogueo f crime .It is bad enough to cut down an enemy

,to shoot

him in the back ; but when it comes to slaying a victim as helpless as a babe

,incapable o f entering a pro

test, innocent o f all wrong save that O f existing ; wheneven baptism is denied it,

'

an d thereby the sight O fGod fo r all eternity ; when finally the victim is one’sown flesh and blood, the language O f hell alone iscapable o f qualifying such deeds .

D O n ot say there is no injustice . Every innocenthuman being, at every stage o f its existence, fromthe first to the last, born o r unborn, has a natural andinalienable right to live , as lo ng as nature

’s lawsoperate in its favor. Being innocen t it cannot forfeitthat right. God is n o exceptor o f persons ; a soulis a soul

,whether it be the soul o f a pontiff, a king

or a sage, o r the soul O f the unborn babe O f the last

woman o f the people . In every case , the right to liveis exactly the same .

The circumstances,regular o r irregular, Of its

coming into life,not being Of its own making, do not

affect the right in the least . It obeyed the law bywhich every man is created ; it could not disobey, fo r

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

230 M ORAL BRIEFS.

as guilty before God a s if I perpetrated the crimein deed . It is more than a desire to commit sin

,

which is sinful ; it is a specific sin in itself, and in thismatter, it is murder pure and simple .This applies with equal force to the agent who

does the deed, to the principal who has it done o r

consents to its being done, to those who advise, en

courage , urge o r co -Operate in any way therein , aswell

.as to those who having authority to prevent,neglect to use it. The sta in o f blood is on the soul O fevery person to whom any degree Of responsibilityo r complicity can be attached .

If every murderer in this enlightened Christianland of ours received the rope which is his o r her due ,according to the letter Of the law , business would bebrisk for quite a spell . It is a small town that has n otits professional babe-slaughterer

,

‘

Who succeeds inevading the law even when he contrives to kill two ato n e time . He does not like to do it, but there is moneyin it, you know ; and he pockets his unholy bloodmoney without a squirm . Don’t prosecute him ; if youdo ,he will make revelations that will startle the town .

As for the unnatural mother, it is best to leaveher to listen in the dead Of night to the appealing voiceo f her murdered babes before the tribunal of God’sinfinite justice. Their blood calls fo r vengeance .

CHAPTER LXXIV ‘

ENMITY.

KILLING is not the only thing forbidden by theFifth Commandment ' thereby are prescribed all formsOf enmity, Of which killing is one , that attack eitherdirectly o r indirectly, in thought o r desire , as well asin deed, the life, limbs o r health Of the neighbor. Thefifth precept protects the physica l man ; everythingtherefore that partakes o f the nature of a design on

the body of another is an Offense against thiscommandment. All such offenses are n ot equallygrievous , but each contains a malice o f its own , whichis prescribed under the head O f killing.

Enmity that takes the form o f fighting, assaultand battery

,is clearly a breach Of the law o f God .

It is lawful to wound,maim and otherwise disable an

assailant, on the principle of self-defense, when thereis no other means of protecting oneself against attack .

But outside this contingency, such conduct is ruffianismbefore man

,and sin before God. The State alone has

the right to inflict penalties and avenge wrongs ; toturn this right over to every individual would bedestructive of society. If this sort of a thing isunlawful and criminal when there might be some kindOf an excuse fo r it on the ground Of injury received ,the malice thereof is aggravated considerably by thefact of there being no excuse at all

,or only imag inary

ones .There is another form Of enmity o r hatred that

runs not to blows but to words . Herein is evil , notbecause O f any bodily injury wrought

, o f which thereis none, but because o f the diabolical spirit thatmanifests itself, a spirit reproved by God and which ,

232 M ORAL BRIEFS.

in g iven circumstances , is ready to resort to physicalInj ury and even to the letting o f blood . There can

be n o doubt that hatred in itself is forbidden by thiscommandment, for

“whosoever hateth his brother is a

murderer,”according to St. John . It matters little

,

therefore, whether such hatred be in deeds or in words ;the malice is there and the sin is consummated . Aperson , too weak to do an enemy bodily harm,

mayOften use his or her tongue to better effect than anothercould his fists , and the verbal outrage thus committedmay be worse than a physical on e.

It is not even necessary that the spirit o f enmityShow itself at all on the outside for the incurring ofsuch guilt as attends the violation of thiscommandment . It is sufficient that it possess the souland go no far ther than a desire to do harm . This isthe spirit of revenge , and it is none the less sinful inthe eyes of God because it lacks the complement ofexterior acts . It is immoral to nourish a grudgeagainst a fellow-man . Such a spirit only awaits anoccasion to deal a blow , and, when tha t occasion showsitself

,will be ready

,willing and anxious to strike . The

Lord refuses the gifts and offerings and prayers o f

such people as these ; they are told to go and becomereconciled with their brother and lay low the spiritthat holds them ; then , and only then, willtheir offerings be acceptable .

Even less than this suffices to constitute a breachof the Fifth Commandment. It is the quality o f suchpassions as envy and jealousy to sometimes be contentwith the mere thought of injury done to their Obj ect,without. even going so far as to desire to work theevil themselves . These passions are Often held incheck for a time ; but, in the event of misfortunebefalling the hated rival

,there follows a sense o f

complacency an d satisfaction which, if entertained, hasall the malice of mortal sin . If, on the contrary, theprosperity o f another inspire us with a feeling o f

regret and sadness,which is deliberately countenanced

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

234 M ORAL BRIEFS.

obnoxious to us for many natural reasons . Con cerningthese latter, it might be said that it is natura l, oftentimes necessary and proper, to oppose them by alllegitimate means . This Opposition , however lawful, isscarcely ever compatible with any high degree o f

charity o r affection . But whatever of aversion ,antipathy o r even hatred is thereby engendered, it isnot o f a personal nature ; it does not attain theindividual , but embraces a category of beings as a

whole,who become identified with the cause they

sustain and thereby fall under the common enmity.

The law that binds us unto love of ou r enemyoperates only in favor of the units, and not o f thegroup as a group .

Hatred,aversion

,antipathy, such as divides

peoples,races and communities

,is on e, though not the

highest,characteristic o f patriotism ; it may be called

the defect o f a quality. When a man is whole-souledin a cause

,he will brook with difficulty any system of

ideas opposed to,and destructive of, his own . Anxious

for the triumph o f what he believes the cause of rightand justice, he will rej oice over the discomfitu re of hisrivals and the defeat of their cause . Wars leave behindan inheritance o f hatred ; persecution makes woundsthat take a long time to heal . The descendants of thedefeated, conquered o r persecuted will look upon thegenerations o f their fathers’ foes as typifyingoppression , tyranny and injustice, will wish them allmanner o f evil and gloat over their downfall . Suchfeelings die hard . They spring from convictions . Thewounds made by injustice , fancied o r real , will smart ;and just as naturally will men retain in their hea rtsaversion for all that which

,for them

,stands for such

injustice . This is criminal only when it fails to respectthe individual and become personal hate .Him who has done us a personal injury we must

forgive . Pa rdon drives hatred out of the heart. Loveo f God is incompatible with personal enmity ; thereforesuch enmity must be quelched . He who says he loves

OUR ENEM IES. 23 5

God and hates his brother is a liar, according to divinetestimony. What takes the place o f this hate' Love

,

a love that is called common love, to distinguish it

from that special sort o f affection that we have forfriends . This is a general kind of love that embracesall men , and excludes none individually . It forbidsall uncharity towards a man as a unit

,and it supposes

a disposition o f the soul that would n ot refuse to givea full measure o f love and assistance, if necessityrequired it. This sort of love leaves no room forhatred of a personal nature in the heart.Is it enough to forgive Sincerely from the heart '

It is not enough ; we must manifest our forgiveness,and this for three good reasons 'first, in order to secureus against self-illusion an d to test the sincerity of ou r

dispositions ; secondly, in order to put an end to discordby showing the other party that we hold no grudge ;lastly

,in order to remove whatever scandal may have

been given by our breach o f friendship . The disordero f enmity can be thoroughly cured an d healed only byan open renewal o f the ties of friendship ; and this isdone by the offering and acknowledgment of the signso f friendship .

The signs o f friendship are o f two sorts , the on ecommon

,the other special . Common tokens o f friend

ship are those signs which are current among peopleof the same condition o f life ; such as saluting,answering a question

,dealing in business affairs , etc .

These are commonly regarded as sufficient to takeaway any reasonable suspicion o f hatred, although , inmatter O f fact, the infer ence may be false. But therefusal to give such tokens o f pardon usually arguesthe presence o f an uncharitable feeling that is sinful ;it is nearly always evidence o f an unforgiving spirit.There are certain cases wherein the Offense receivedbeing o f a peculiar nature

,justifies on e in deferring

such evidence o f forgiveness ; but these cases are rare.

If we are obliged to Show by unmistakable sign sthat we forg ive a wrong that has been done , we are

236 M ORAL BRIEFS.

in n otvise bound to make a particular friend o f theperson who has been guilty o f the wrong. We neednot go out o f o ur way to meet him

,receive o r visit

him o r treat him as a long lost brother. He wouldn ot expect it, and we fulfil ou r obligations toward himby the ordinary civilities we Show him in the businessof life .If we have offended, we must take the first step

toward reconciliation an d apologize ; that is the onlyway we have o f repairing the injury done , and to thiswe are held in conscience . If there is equal blame o nboth sides

,then both are bound to the same duty o f

offering an apology. To refuse such advances on thepart of one who has wronged us is to commit an offensethat might very easily be grievous .

All this,of course , is apart from the question o f

indemnification in case of real damage being sustained .

We may condone a n offense and at the same timerequire that the loss suffered be repaired . And in casethe delinquent refuse to settle amicably, we are justifiedin pursuing him before the courts . Justice is notn ecessarily opposed to charity.

CHAPTER LXXVI .

IMMO RA L ITY.

THE natural order o f things brings us to aconsideration of the Sixth Comman dment, and at thesame time , of the Ninth , as treating of the same matter— a matter so highly immoral as to deserve the specificappellation of immorality.

People, as a rule, are'

tolerably well informed onthis subj ect. It is a knowledge a cquired by instinct,the depraved instinct of ou r fallen nature, and supple

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

238 M ORAL BRIEFS.

makes evil the food of his mind and ponderscomplacently on the seductive beauty of vice is no lessguilty than he who goes beyond theory into practice .This is something we frequently forget, o r would fainforget

,the greed o f passion blinding us more o r less

voluntarily to the real moral value o f our acts .As a consequence of this self-illusion man y a

on e finds himself far beyond his depth in the sea o f

immorality before he fully realizes his position. It issmall beginnings that lead to lasting results ; it is byrepeated acts that habits are formed ; and evil grows onus faster than most o f us are willing to a cknowledge .All manner of good and evil originates in thought ;and that is where the little monster of uncleannessmust be strangled before it is full-grown , if we wouldbe free from its unspeakable thralldom .

Again,this is a matter the malice and evil of

which very, very ra rely, if ever, escapes us . He whocommits a sin o f impurity and says he did not knowit was wrong, lies deliberately , o r else he is not in hisright frame of mind . The Maker has left in our soulsenough of natural virtue and grace to enable us todistinguish right and wrong, clean and unclean ; eventhe child with no definite knowledge o f the matter,meeting it for the first time , instinctively blushes an drecoils from the moral hideousness of its aspect.Conscience here speaks in n o uncertain accents ; healone does n ot hear who does not wish to hear.Catholic theologians are even more rigid

concerning the matter itself,prescinding altogether

from our perception o f it. They say that here no levityo f matter is allowed , tha t is to say, every violation,however slight, o f either of these two commandments ,is a sin . You cannot even touch this pitch of moraldefilemen t without being yourself defiled. It is uselesstherefore to argue the matter and enter a plea oftriviality and inconsequence ; nothing is trivial that iso f a nature to offend God and damn a soul .Weakness has the same value as an excuse as it

IM M ORALITY. 39

has elsewhere in moral matters . Few sins are o f puremalice ; weakness is responsible fo r the damnation o f

all, o r nearly all, the lost. That very weakness is thesin , fo r virtue is strength. To make this plea thereforeis to make no plea at all , fo r we are all weak,desperately weak, especially against the demon o f theflesh, and we become weaker by yielding. And weare responsible for the degree of moral debility underwhich we labor just as we are for the degree of guiltwe have incurred .

Fina lly, as God, is no exceptor o f persons , Hedoes not distinguish between souls, and sex makesno difference with Him . In this His judgment differsfrom that of the world which absolves the man andcondemns the woman . There is no evident reason whythe violation of a divine precept should be less criminalin on e human creature than in another. And if thereprobation o f society does not follow both equally, thewrath o f God does , and He will render unto everyone according to his and her works .

CHAPTER LXXVII .

THE SINK O F INI'UITY.

THE malice of lust consists in the abuse o f anatural , a quasi-divine faculty, which is prostituted toignoble purposes foreign to the ends by the Creatorestablished . The lines along which this faculty may belegitimately exercised

,are laid down by natural and

divine laws , destined to preserve God’s rights , to

maintain order in society and to protect man againsthimself. The laws result in the founda tion o f a state ,called matrimony, within which the exercise o f thishuman prerogative , delegated to man by the Creator,

240 M ORAL BRIEFS.

receives the sanction o f divine authority,and becomes

invested with a sacred character, as sacred as its abuseis abominable and odious .To disregard and ignore this condition of things

and to seek satisfaction for one’s passions outside thedomain o f lawful wedlock, is to revolt against thisorder of creative wisdom and to violate the letter o fthe law. But the intrinsic malice o f the evil appearsin the nature o f this violation . This abuse touches life ;not life in its being, but in its source, in the principlethat makes all vitality possible

,which is still more

serious . Immorality is therefore a moral poisoning ofthe wells of life . It profanes and desecrates a facultyand prerogative so sacred that it is likened to thealmighty power o f the Crea tor.

A manifold malice may attach to a single act inviolation of the law o f moral purity. The burden of avow in either party incurring guilt, whether that vowbe matrimonial o r religious , is a circumstance that addsinjustice o r sacrilege to the crime , according to thenature o f that vow ; and the double guilt is on bothparties . If the vow exists in on e and the otherdelinquent

,then the offense is still further multiplied

and the guilt aggravated . Blood-relationship adds aspecific malice o f its own , slight o r grievous accordingto the intimacy of said relationship . Fornication,adultery

,sacrilege and incest— these , to give to things

their proper names,are terms that specify various

degrees of malice and guilt in this matter ; and althoughthey do not sound well o r look well in print, they havea meaning which sensible folks should not ignore .

A lapse from virtue is bad ; the habit o r vice,voluntarily entertained

,is infinitely worse . If the on e

argues weakness , even culpable, the other betrays astudied contempt for God and the law , an utterperversion of the moral sense that does not even esteemvirtue in itself ; an appalling thralldom o f the spiritto the flesh

,an appetite that is all ungodly, a gluttony

that is bestial . Very often it supposes a victim held

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

242 M ORAL BRIEFS.

no human power can break that bond . The permissiontherefore to r e-marry is permission to live in adultery

,

and that permission is,of its very nature

,null and

void . They who avail themselves of such a permission and live in Sin , may count on the protection of

the law , but the law will n ot protect them against the

yvr ath o f the Almighty who condemns their immoralWing.

CHAPTER LXXVIII .

WHEREIN NATURE IS OPPOSED.

CERTAIN excesses , such as we have already alludedto, however base and abominable lIl themselves andtheir effects , have nevertheless this to their credit that,while violating the positive law of God, they respectat least the fundamental laws o f nature, according towhich the universe is constructed and ordered. To

satisfy one’s depraved appetites along forbidden butnatural lines

,is certainly criminal ; but an unnatural

and beastly instinct is sometimes n ot satisfied with suchabuse and excess ; the passion becomes so blinded a s

to ignore the difference o f sex, runs even lower, to theinferior order of brutes . This is the very acme o f

ungodliness .There are laws on the statute books against

abominations o f this sort ; and be it said to the shameo f a Christian community, said laws find an only toofrequent application . Severe as are the penalties , theyare less an adequate punishment than a publicexpression of the common horror inspired by the verymention o f crimes they are destined to chastise . Toattain this depth o f infamy is at o n e and the sametime to sin and to receive the penalty o f sin . Here

WHEREIN NATURE IS OPPOSED. 243

culminates repeated violence to the moral law . Whenon e is sated with ordinary lusts and is bent on sweepingthe whole gamut of mundane experiences and excitations

,that o n e invariably descends to the unnatural

and extraordinary, an d lives a life of protest against

nature .St. Paul confirms this . According to him, God,

in punishment for sin delivers over people to shamefulaffections

, to a reprobate sense ; he suffers them to bea hell unto themselves . And nature seldom fails toavenge herself fo r the outrages suffered . She uses theflail of disease and remorse, o f misery and disgust, andshe scourges the culprit to the verge of the grave , oftento the yawning pit o f hell.People shudder at the very thought of such

unmentionable things 'but there are circles in societyin which such sanctimonious shuddering is a mightythin veil o f hypocrisy . Infin itely more common , andlittle, if any, less unnatural and abominable a re thecrimes that are killing off the Old stock that oncepossessed the land and making the country dependentfor increase of population on the floods of immigration .

The old Puritan families are almost extinct ; Boston ismore Irish than Dublin . The phenomenon is so striking here that it is called New E nglandism. Why arethere so few large families outside the Irish andCanadian e lements' Why are there seen so fewchildren in the fashionable districts o f ou r large cities'Why this blast of sterility with which the land iscursed ' Look behind the phenomenon

,and you will

find the cause ; and the finding will make you shudder.And if only those shudder who are free from stain

,the

shuddering will be scarcely audible . Onan and Malthusas household gods are worse than the gods of Rome .

Meanwhile , the unit deteriorates alongside thefamily, being given over to a r eprobat sense that iscentered in self, that furnishes , against all law ,

its ownsatisfactions , and reaps , in all justice , its inevitableha rvest o f woe . To what extent this vice is common it

244 M ORAL BRIEFS.

would serve no purpose to examine ; students of

criminology have more than once made known theirviews on the matter. The character of its malice, bothmoral and physical , needs no comment ; na ture isoutraged . But it has this among its several features ;the thralldom to which it subj ects its victim hasnothing outside itself to which it may be compared .

Man’s self is his own greatest tyrant ; there are notortures so exquisite as those we provide for ourselves .While therefore we reprove the culprit, we commiseratewith the unfortunate victim, and esteem that there isnone more worthy of sympathy, conditioned, o f course ,o n a state o f mind and soul o n his part that seeksrelief and freedom ; otherwise, it were pity wasted.

We have done with this infernal category o f Sin

and filth . Yet we would remark right here that forthe most part

,as far as they are general and common

,

these excesses are the result of on e cause ; and thatcause is everyday systematic Godlessness such as ou rpublic schools are largely responsible fo r . Thissystem is responsible for a want of vital Christianity ,

o f a lack o f faith and religion that penetrates thehuman fibre and makes God and morality a factor inevery deed . Deprived o f this , youth has nothing to fallback on when the hour o f temptation comes ; and whenhe falls , nothing to keep him from the bottom o f thepit.

It is impossible to put this argument in detailbefore the Christian and Catholic parent . If the parentdoes not see it, it is because that parent is deficientin the most essential quality o f a pa rent. Nothingbut the atmosphere of a religious school can save ou ryouth from being victims o f that maelstrom ofimpurity that sweeps the land . And that alone withthe rigid principles of morality there inculcated

,can

save the parents o f to-morrow from the blight andcurse of New Englandism.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

246 M ORAL BRIEFS.

pinnacle of goodness , it may also sink him to the lowestlevel of infamy. Only, in one ca se, it is spiritualizedlove , in the other, it is carnal ; in o n e case it obeys thespirit, in the other, the flesh ; in one case its true nameis charity, in the other, it is animal, sexual instinct,and it is only improperly called love . F o r God is love .

Love therefore is pure . That which is not pure is notlove.

People who trifle with the affections usually cometo woe sooner o r later, sooner rather than later ; affairso f the heart are always morally malodorous affairs .Frequently there is evil on one side at least, in intention,from the start. The devil’s game is to play on thechaste attachment, and in an unguarded moment , toswing it around to his point . If the victim does notbalk at the first shock and surprise , the game is won ;fo r long experience has made him confident of beingable to make the counterfeit look like the real ; and itrequires , as a general rule, little argument to make uslook at our faults in their best light.

Many a pure love has degenerated and many avirtue fallen

,why'because people forget who and what

they are , forget they are human ,forget they are

creatures o f flesh and blood, predisposed to Sin ,

saturated with concupiscence and naturally frail as areed against the seductions of the wily on e. Theyforget this

,and act as though theirs were an angelic,

instead o f a human , nature . They imagine themselvesproof against that which counts such victims as Davidand Solomon

,which would cause the fall o f a Father

o f the desert, or even of an angel from heavenencumbered with the burden we carry , if he despisedthe claims of ordina ry common sense .

And thi s forgetfulness on their part, let it beremembered

,is wholly voluntary and culpable , at least

in its cause . They may not have been attentive at theprecise moment that the flames o f passion reached themine o f their affections ; but they were well aware tha tthings would come inevitably to such a pass . And

HEARTS. 247

when the mine went up , as it was natural, what won derif disaster followed 'Who is to blame but themselves 'People do not play with matches around a powdermagazine ; and if they do , very little consolation comeswith the knowledge o f their folly when they are beingpicked up in sections from out o f “the ruins .

Of course there are easier victims than these,such

as would not recognize true inter-sexual love if theysaw it through a magnifying glass ; everything o f thenature o f a fancy o r whim , of a sensation o r emotionwith them is love . Love Sick maidens are usuallysoft-brained

,and their languorous swains, lascivious .

The latter pose as “killers the former wear theirheart on their sleeve, and are convinced that everysecond man they meet who treats them gallantly issmitten with their charms a nd is passionately in lovewith them .

Some go in for excitement and novelty , to breakthe monotony o f virtuous restraint . They are anxiousfor a little adventure and romance . A good thing,too , to have these exploits to narrate to their friends .But they do not tell all to their friends ; they wouldbe ashamed to . If said friends are wise they can

supply the deficiencies . And when it is all over, itis the same old story o f the man that did not knowthe gun was loaded .

They therefore who would remain pure must ofall necessity keep custody over their heart’s affections ,make right reason and faith their guide and makethe will force obedience thereto. If wrong attachmentsare formed , then there is nothing to do but to eradicatethem , to cut, tear and crush ; they must be destroyedat any cost . A pennyweight o f prudence might haveprevented the evil ; it will now take mo rtification in

large and repeated doses to undo it. In this alone isthere salvation .

CHAPTER LXXX .

OCCASIONS .

OCCASIONS of sin are persons , places o r thingsthat may easily lead us into sin ' this definition of thelittle catechism is simple and clear and requires nocomment. It is n ot necessary that said places o r

things, o r even said persons , be evil in themselves ;

it is sufficient that contact with, o r proximity to, theminduce o n e to commit an evil . It may happen, andsometimes does

,that a person without any evil design

whatever become an occa sion o f sin for another. Theblame therefore does not necessarily lie with obj ects ,but rather with the subject.

Occasions are of two kinds ' the remote o r farand the proximate o r near ; they differ in the degreeo f facility with which they furn ish temptation , andin the quality and nature o f such temptation . In theformer, the danger o f falling is less , in the latter it ismore , probable . In theory, it is impossible to drawthe line and say just when an occasion ceases to beproximate and becomes remote ; but in the concretethe thing is easy enough . If I have a well-groundedfear, a fear made prudent by experience that iii thiso r that conjuncture I sha ll sin , then it is a nearoccasion for me . If , however, I can feel withknowledge and conviction that I am strong enough toovercome the inevitable temptation arising from thiso ther conjunction of circumstances

,the occasion is

only remote.Thus , since danger in moral matters is nearly

a lways relative ; what is a remote occasion for on e maybe a proximate occasion for another. Proneness to evil

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 5 0 M ORAL BRIEFS.

If it is a clear case of proximate occasion o f sin,and all means fail to change it, then the suppositiono f impossibility is a ridiculous one . It is paramountto asserting that Sin and o ffen se o f God is sometimesnecessary ; and to talk thus is to talk nonsense. Sin isa deliberate act o f a free will ; mention necessity in thesame breath

,and you destroy the notion of Sin . There

ca n never be an impossibility of avoiding sin ;consequently

,there can never be an impossibility of

avoiding a near occasion o f sin.

It may be hard , very difficult ; but that is anotherthing. But, as we have already said, the difficulty i srather within than without us

,it arises from a la ck o f

will power . But hard o r easy, these occasions mustnevertheless be removed . Let the suffering entailedbe what it may, the eye must be plucked out, the armmust be lopped o ff, to use the Saviour

’s figurativelanguage , if in no other way the soul can be savedfrom sin . Better to leave your father’s house

,better

to give up your very life , than to damn your soul fo r alleternity. But extremes are rarely called for ; smallsacrifices Often cost more than great ones . A gooddose o f ordinary

,everyday mo rtification and penance

goes a long way toward producing the necessary effect .An ounce o f self-denial will work miracles in asluggard, cowardly soul .It would be Well on occasion to remember this ,

especially when one in such a state is thinking seriouslyo f going to confession ' if he is not prepared to makethe required effort, then he had better stay away untilsuch a time a s he is willing. For if he states his casecorrectly

,he will not receive absolution ; if his avowal

is not according to fact, his confession is void , perhapssacrilegious . Have done with sin before you canexpect to have your sins forgiven .

CHAPTER LXXXI .

SCANDAL.

O N ONLY rare occasions do people who followthe bent of their unbridled passions bethink themselves o f the double guilt that frequently attachesto their sins . Seemingly satisfied with the evil theyha ve wrought unto their own souls , they choose toignore the wrong they may have done unto othersas a consequence of their sinful doings . They believein the principle that every soul is personally r espo n

sible for its own damnation 'which is true ; but theyforget that many elements may enter as causes intosuch a calamity . We are in nowise isolated beingsin this world ; ou r lives may, and do , affect the liveso f others

,and influence them sometimes to an extra

ordinary extent. We shall have, each o f us , to answero n e day for results of such influence ; there is no manbut is , in this sense , his brother

’s guardian .

There are,who deny this

,like Cain . Yet we

know that Jesus Christ spoke clearly His mind inregard to scandal , and the emphasis He lays o n Hisanathemas leaves no room to doubt o f His judgmento n the subj ect. Scandal

,in fact

,is murder ; not

corporal murder,which is a vengeance-crying abom

imation , but spiritual murder, heinous over the otherin the same measure as the soul’s va lue transcendsthat o f the body . Kill the body

,and the soul may

live and be saved kill the soul and it is lost eternally .

Properly speaking,scandal is any word o r deed ,

evil o r even with an appearance o f evil , of a natureto furnish an occasion o f Spiritual downfall , to leadanother into sin . It does n ot even matter whether

2 5 2 M ORAL BRIEFS.

the results be intended or merely suffered to occur ;it does n ot even matter if no results follow at all . Itis sufficient that the stumbling-block o f scandal beplaced in the way of another to his spiritual peril

,

and designed by nature to make him fall ; o n himwho placed it, is the guilt o f scandal .The act o f scandal consists in making sin easier

to commit— as though it were not already easy enoughto sin— fo r another . Natural grace, o f which we aren ot totally bereft, raises certain barriers to protectand defend the weak and feeble . Conspicuous amongthese are ignorance and Shame ; evil sometimes offersdifficulties , the ones physical , the others spiritual , suchas innate delicacy

,sense of dignity, timidity, in stin c

tive repugnance for filth,human respect

,dread Of

consequences , etc . These stand on guard before thesoul to repel the first advances o f the tempter whichare the most dangerous ; the Devil seldom unmaskshis heavy batteries until the advance-posts o f the soulare taken . It is the business o f scandal to break downthese barriers

,and for scandal this work is as easy as

it is nefarious . For curiosity is a hungering appe

tite , virtue is often protected with a very thin veil ,an d vice can be made to lose its hideousness andassume charms

,to untried virtue

,irresistible. There

is nothing doing fo r His Satanic Maj esty while scandalis in the field ; he looks o n and smiles .There may be some truth in the Darwinian theory

after all , if we judge from the imitative propensitieso f the species , probably an inherited trait o f ou r common ancestor, the monkey. At any rate , we are oftenmore easily led by example than by conviction ;example leads us against our convictions . Asked whywe did this or that, knowing we should not have doneit, we answer with simian honesty,

“because sucha one did it , or invited us to do it. We get over a

good many old-fashioned notions concerning modestyand purity, after listening to the experiences of others ;we forget to be ashamed in the presence o f the brazen ,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 5 4 M ORAL BRIEFS.

And although theoretically possible,how can anyone

count on such a contingency in his o r her particularcase ' If the scandalous would reflect seriously onthis , they would be less willing to take the chancesoffered by a possibility of this na ture.

CHAPTER LXXXII .

NOT GOOD TO BE ALONE .

A M A N may come to discover that the state inwhich he finds himself placed, is not the o n e fo r

which he was evidently intended by the Maker. Wedo not all receive the same gifts because our callingsare different ; each of us is endowed in accordanceand in harmony with the ends o f the Creator inmaking us . Some men Should marry, others maynot ; but the state o f celibacy is for the few, andnot for the many

,these few depending solely o n an

abundant grace of God.

Again,one may become alive to the fact that

to remain in an abnormal position means to seriouslyj eopardize his soul’s salvation ; celibacy may, as formany it does

,spell out for him , clearly and plainly,

eternal damnation . It is to no purpose here toexamine the causes o f, and reasons for, such a condition o f affairs . We take the fact as it stands ,plain and evident

,a stern

,hard fact that will not be

downed,because it is supported by the living proof

o f habit and conduct ; living and continuing to livea celibate

,taking him as he is and as there is every

token o f his remaining without any reasonableground for expecting a change

,this man is doomed

to perdition . His passions have made him theirslave ; he cannot, it is morally impossible for himto do so , remain continent.

NOT GOOD To BE ALONE. 2 5 5

Suppose again that the Almighty has created thestate o f wedlock for just such emergencies

,whereby

a man may find a remedy for his weaknesses,an out

let fo r his passions , a regulator o f his life here belowand a security against damnation herea fter ; and thisis precisely the case, for the ends o f marriage are n otonly to perpetuate the species , but also to furnish aremedy fo r na tural concupiscence and to raise a barrier against the flood of impurity .

Now , the case being as stated, need a Catholic,young o r— a no longer young - man look long o r

strive hard to find his path o f duty already clearlytraced ' And in making this application we refer toman , not to woman, for reasons that are obvious ;we refer, again , to those among men whose spiritualsense is n ot yet wholly dead, who have n ot entirelylost all respect for virtue in itself 'who still claim tohave an immortal soul and hOpe to save it ; but whohave been caught in the maelstrom of vice and whosepassions and lusts have outgrown in strength the ordinary resisting powers o f natural virtue and religionincomplete and half-hearted . These can appreciatetheir position ; it would be well fo r them to do so ;the faculty fo r so doing may not always be left withthem.

The obligation to marry , to increase and multiply

,was given to mankind in general , and applies

to man as a whole,and not to the individual ; that is ,

in the common and ordinary run of human things .But the circumstances with which we are dealing areoutside the normal Sphere ; they are extraordinary ,that is say

,they do not exist in accordance with the

plan and order established by God ; they constitutea disorder resulting from unlawful indulgence an d

wild impiety. It may therefore be,and it frequently

is the case , that the general obligation to marryparticularize itself an d fall with its full weight o n theindividual , this o n e o r that o n e, according to the circumstan ces o f his life . Then it is that the voice o f

2 5 6 M ORAL BRIEFS .

God’s authority reaches the ear of the unit and saysto him in no uncertain accents 'thou shalt marry. Andbehind that decree of God stands divine j ustice tovindica te the divine right .We do not deny but that, absolutely speaking ,

recourse to this remedy may not be imperiouslydemanded ; but we do claim that the absolute hasnothing whatever to do with the question which ison e o f relative facts . What a supposed man maydo in this o r that given circumstance does not in theleast a lter the position o f another real , live man whowill not do this o r that thing in a given circumstance ;he will n ot, because , morally speaking, he cannot ;and he cannot, Simply because through excesses hehas forgotten how. And of other reasons to justifynon-compliance with the law

,there can be none ; it is

here a question of saving one’s soul ; inconveniencesand difficulties a n d obstacles have no meaning insuch a contingency.

And, mind you , the effects of pr ofligate celibacyare farther—reaching than many o f us would supposeat first blush. The culprit bears the odium o f it in hissoul . But what about the state o f those— o r rathero f her, whoever she may be, known o r unknownwhom he , in the order o f Providence, is destined tosave from the precariousness o f single life ' If it ishis duty to take a wife, whose salvation as well ashis own , perhaps depends on the fulfilment o f thatduty, and if he shirks his duty, shall he not be heldresponsible for the results in her as well as in himself

,

since he could, and she could not, ward o ff the evil 'It has come to such a pass nowadays that

celibacy, as a general thing, is a misnomer forprofligacy. Making all due allowance for honorableexceptions , the unmarried male who is not wellsaturated with spirituality and faith is notoriouslygallinaceous in his mora ls . In certain classes

,he is

expected to sow his wild oats before he is o ut of histeens ; and by this is meant that he will begin young

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 5 8 M ORAL BRIEFS.

infamy,in order that the load o f opprobrium thus

heaped upon his guilty head may at least deter theclean from such defilemen t.But

,if guilt is a lways guilt, the quality o f guilt

is varied . Just as all virtue is not equally meritorious,so to other sources than personal unworthiness mayoften be traced moral debility that strives againstnatural causes , necessary conditions o f environmentand an ever-present and ever-a ctive influence for evil .A fall does n ot always betoken profound degradation,nor a stain, acute perversity of the will . Thosetherefore who wrestle manfully with the effects ofregretted lapses o r weaknesses , who fight down,sometimes perhaps unsuccessfully, the strongtendencies of a too exuberant animal na ture, whostrive to neutralize an influence that unduly oppressesthem,

— against these, guilty though they may havebeen, is not directed the moralist

’s unmeasuredcensure . His reproaches in such cases tend less tocondemn than to awake to a sense o f moralresponsibility ; earnestness in pointing out remedy andsafeguards takes the place of severity againstwilfulness . F o r he knows that not a few sentenceso f condemnation Christ writes on the sands , as Hedid in a celebrated case, and many an over-zealousaccuser he has confounded

,like the villainous

Pharisees whom He challenged to show a hand whiteenough to be worthy to cast the first stone .

Evidently such pity and commiseration shouldn ot serve to make vice less unlovely and thus undo thevery work it is intended to perform . It should nothave the characteristics o f certain books and playsthat pretend to teach morality by exposing vice in allits seductiveness . Over-sensitive and maudlin sympathyis as ridiculous as it is unhealthy ; its tendency isprincipally to encourage and spoil . But a judicious ,discreet and measured sympathy will lift up the fallen ,strengthen the weak and help the timorous over manya difficulty. It will suggest

,too

,the means best

A HELP ING HAND . 2 5 9

calculated to insure freedom from slavery o f the

passions .The first of these is self- denial, which is the

inseparable companion o f chastity ; when they are n otfound together

,seldom does either exist. And by

self-denial is here meant the destruction o f that eternal

'reference for self, that is at the bottom o f alluncleanness , that makes all things , however sacred,subservient to one’s own pleasures , tha t considersnothing unlawful but what goes against the grainof natural impulse and natural appetites . There maybe other causes, but this self-love is a primary on e.

Say what you will, but o n e does not fa ll from hisown level ; the moral world is like the physical ; if youare

'

raised aloft in disregard for the laws o f truth,you are going to come down with a thud . If youimagine all the pleasures o f life made fo r you,and become lawful beca use your nature craves fo rthem, you are taking a too high estimate o f yourself ;you are going before a fall. He who takes a correctmeasure of himself, gets his bearings in relation toGod, comes to realize his own weak points and severaldeficiencies , a nd acknowledges the obligations such a

state o f affairs places upon him, that on e may sin, buthe will n ot go far.He may fall , because he is human, because

strength sufficient to guard us against the assaults o fimpurity is not from us, but from God. The spirito f humility

,therefore

,which makes known to him

his own insufficiency, must be fortified with the spirito f faith which makes him ask fo r support throughprayer. It is faith that makes prayer possible , andliving faith , the spirit of faith , that makes us prayaright. This kind of prayer need n ot express itselfin words ; it may be a habit, a long drawn out desire ,an habitual longing fo r help coupled with firmconfidence in God’s mercy to grant ou r request . No

state o f soul however disordered can long resist such

260 M ORAL BRIEFS.

a power, and no habit o f evil but in time will beannihilated by it.

The man or woman who undertakes to keephimself or herself pure, o r to rise o ut o f a habit o fSin without the liberal use o f divine supplication has inhand a very ungrateful task, and he or she will realizeit before going far. And unless that prayer is Sincereand heartfelt

,a prayer full o f faith that will not

entertain the thought of failure,every effort will be

barren o f results . You must speak to God as to onenear you ,

and remember that He is near you all thetime .Then there are the sacraments to repair every

breach and to heal every wound . Penance will cleanseyou, communion ~will adorn and equip you anew.

Confession will give you a better knowledge o f yourselfevery time you go ; the Food o f God will strengthenevery fibre o f your soul and steel you against theseductions that otherwise would make you a readyvictim . Don’t go once a year

,go ten

,twenty times

and more , if necessary, go until you feel that you ownyourself, that you can command and be obeyed . Thenyou will n ot have to be told to stop ; you will be safe.

CHAPTER LXXXIV.

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

THE Seventh Commandment is protective of theright o f property which is vested in every humanbeing enjoying the use of reason . Property meansthat which belongs to one

,that which is one’s own ,

to have and to hold , o r to dispose o f, at one’s pleasure ,

o r to reclaim in the event of actual dispossession. The

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

262 M ORAL BRIEFS.

different circumstances that we can come to enunciatean approximate general rule that will serve as a guidein the ordinary contingencies o f life .Thus , o f two individuals deprived by theft of a

same amount o f worldly goods , the one may sufferthereby to a much greater extent than the other ;he who suffers more is naturally more reluctant topart with his goods, and a greater injustice ls doneto him than to the other. The sin committed againsthim is therefore greater than that committed againstthe other. A rich man may n ot feel the loss o f a dollar

,

whereas for another less prosperous the loss o f lessthan that sum might be of the nature o f a calamity .

To take therefore unjustly from a person what to thatperson is a notable amount is a grievous sin . It isuniformly agreed that it is a notable loss for a manto be unduly deprived o f what constitutes a day

’ssustenance . This is the minimum o f grievous matterconcerning theft .But this rule will evidently not hold good applied

on a rising scale to more and more extensive fortunes ;fo r a time would come when it would be possiblewithout serious guilt to appropriate good round sumsfrom those abundantly blessed with this world’s goods .The disorders necessarily attendant o n such a

moral rule are only too evident ; and it is plain thatthe law o f God cannot countenance abuses o f thisnature . Justice therefore demands tha t there be acertain fixed sum beyond which one may not gowithout incurring serious guilt ; and this , independento f the fortune of the person who suffers . Theolo

gians have fixed that amount approximately, in thiscountry

,at five dollars . This means that when such

a sum is taken,in all cases

,the sin is mortal . It is not

always necessary,it is seldom necessary

,that o n e

should steal this much in order to Offend grievously ;but when the thief reaches this amount

,be his victim

ever so wealthy, he is guilty o f grave injustice .

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. 263

This rule applies to all cases in which the neighboris made to suffer unjustly in his lawful possessions ;and it effects all wrongdoers whether they steal o rdestroy another’s goods or co -Operate efficaciously insuch deeds of sin . It matters n ot whether the harmbe wrought directly o r indirectly , since in either casethere may be moral fault ; and it must be rememberedthat gross negligence may make one responsible aswell as malice aforethought .The following are said to co -operate in crime to

the extent o f becoming joint-partners with the principalagent in guilt 'those in whose name the wrong is done,in obedience to their orders o r as a result o f any othermeans employed ; those who influence the culprit bysuggesting motives and reasons for his crime or bypointing out efficient means of arriving thereat ; thosewho induce others to commit evil by playing on theirWeaknesses thereby subj ecting them to What is knownas moral force ; those who harbor the thief and concealhis stolen property against their recovery ; thoseWhose silence is equivalent to approbation, permissiono r official consent ; those fin ally who before , during orafter the deed

,abstain from performing a plain duty

in preventing,deterring o r bringing to justice the

guilty party. Such persons as the foregoingparticipate as abettors in crime an d share all the guilto f the actual criminals ; sometimes the former areeven more guilty than the latter .The Tenth Commandment which forbids us to

covet ou r neighbor’s goods,bears the same relation

to the Seventh as the Ninth does to the S ixth . It must,however , be borne in mind that all such covetingsupposes injustice in desire , that is , in the means bywhich we desire to obtain what is not ours . To Wishfor to lon g ardently for something that appeals too n e 3 like and fancy is n ot sinful ; the wrong consistsin the desire to acquire it unjustly

,to steal it

,and

thereby work damage unto the neighbor. It is anatural weakness in man to be dissatisfied with what

264 M ORA L BRIEFS.

he has and to sigh a fter what he has n ot ; very fewo f us are free from this failing. But so long as o urcravings and hankerings are not tainted with injustice ,we are innocent o f evil .

CHAPTER LXXXV.

PETTY THEFTS .

A 'UESTION may arise as to petty thefts , venialin themselves

,but o ft repeated an d aggregating in the

long run a sum o f considerable value ' how are Weto deal with such cases ' Should peculations o f thissort be taken singly, and their individual malicedetermined

,without reference to the sum total of

injustice caused ; o r Should no severe judgment bepa ssed until such a time as sufficient matter beaccumulated to make the fault grievous' In otherwords

,is there nothing but venial sin in thefts o f little

values , o r is there only o n e big sin at the end ' Thedifficulty is a practical o n e.

If petty thefts are committed with a view to

amass a n otable sum , the simple fact of such anintention makes the offense a mortal one . For

,as we

have already remarked in treating o f the human act,ou r deeds may be , and frequently are , vitiated by theintention we have in performing them . If we dosomething with evil intent and purpose

,our action

is evil whether the deed in itself be indifferent o r evengood . Here the intention is to cause a grave injustice ;the deed is only a petty theft , but it serves as a meansto a more serious offense . The act therefore takes itsmalice from the purpose o f the agent and becomessinful in a high degree .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

266 M ORAL BRIEFS.

be said tha t such thefts as are separated by an interven ing space o f two months can never be accountedas parts of o n e grave injustice, and a mortal sin cannever be committed by o n e whose venial offenses areo f this nature . Of course if there be an evil purpose,that alone is sufficient to establish a moral unionbetween Single acts o f theft however considerable theinterval that separates them .

Several persons may conspire to purloin each alimited amount . The circumstan ce o f conspiracy,connivance o r collusion makes each co -Operator in thedeed responsible for the whole damage done ; and ifthe amount thus defrauded be notable, each is guiltyo f mortal sin .

We might here add in favor of children whotake small things from their parents and o f wiveswho sometimes relieve their husbands of small change ,that it is natural that a man be less reluctant to beingdefrauded in small matters by his own than by totalstrangers . It is only reasonable therefore that morelatitude be allowed such delinquents when there isquestion of computing the amount to be considerednotable ; perhaps the amount might be doubled in theirfavor. The same might be said in favor of thosewhose petty thefts are directed against several victimsinstead o f one, since the injury Sustained individuallyis less .The best plan is to leave what does not belong to

o n e severely alone. In other Sins there may besomething gained in the long run , but here no suchillusion can be entertained

,for the Spectre of restitution ,

as we shall see,follows every injustice as a shadow

follows its obj ect,and its business is to see that n o

man profitby his ill-gotten goods .

CHAPTER LXXXVI .

AN OFT EXPLOITED BUT SPECIOUS PLEA.

IT IS not an infrequent occurrence fo r personsgiven to the habit o f petty thefts and fraud, to seekto justify their irregular conduct by a pretense o f

j ustice which they call secret compensation . Theystand arraigned before the bar o f their conscience o nthe charge o f filchin g small sums , usually from theiremployers ; they have no will to desist ; they thereforeplead n ot guilty, and have nothing so much at heartas to convince themselves that they act within theirrights . They elaborate a theory o f justice after theirideas , o r rather, according to their own desires ; theybolster it up with facts that limp all the way fromhalf-truths to downright falsities ; a n d thus acquitthemselves of sin , and go their way in peace . A judgeis always lenient when he tries his own case .

Secret compensation is the taking surreptitiouslyfrom another o f the equivalent o f what is due to o n e,

o f what has been taken and is kept against all j ustice,

in order to indemnify oneself for losses sustained .

This sort o f a thing, in theory at least, has a perfectlyplausible look

,nor

,in fact, is it contrary to justice,

when all the necessary conditions are fulfilled to theletter. But the cases in which these conditions ar e

fulfilled are so few and rare that they may hardly besaid to exist at all . It is extremely difficult to findsuch a case

,and nearly always when this practice is

resorted to,the order o f j ustice is violated.

And if common sense in the case o f any givenindividual fail to Show him this truth , we here quotefo r his benefit an authority capable o f putting all hisdoubts at rest . The following proposition was

268 M ORAL BRIEFS .

advanced ' Domestic servants who adjudge themselves underpaid fo r services rendered, may appropriateto themselves by stealth a compensation .

” This

proposition has received the full weight o f papalcondemnation . It cannot be denied that it applies toallwho engage their services for hire . To maintainthe contrary is to revolt against the highest authorityin the Church ; to practise it is purely and Simply to

A case is often made o ut o n the grounds thatwages are small , work very hard and the laborertherefore insufficiently remunerated . But to concludetherefrom the right to help oneself to the employer’sgoods , 18 a strange manner of reasoning

,while it

opens the door to all manner o f injustice . Where Is

there a man, whatever his labor and pay, who couldnot come to the same conclusion ' Who may notconsider himself ill-paid ' And who is there that reallythinks he is not worth more than he gets ' There isno limit to the value one may put on one’s own

services ; and he who is justified to-day in takinga quarter o f a dollar, would be equally justifiedto -morrow in appropriating the whole concern . Andthen what

_

becomes of honesty, an d the right o f

property ' And what security can anyone have againstthe private j udgment of his neighbor '

And what about the contract according to theterms o f which you are to give your services and toreceive in return a stipulated amount ' Was thereany clause therein by which you are entitled to changethe terms o f said contract without consulting the otherparty interested ' You don’t think he would mind it .You don’t think anything o f the kind ; you know hewill and does mind it . He may be generous , but heis not a fool .

“But I make up for it . I work overtime , workharder

,am more attentive to my work ; and thereby

save more for my employer than I take .

” Here youcontradict yourself . You are therefore not under

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

270 M ORAL BRIEFS.

prosecution through the consideration of his formeremployer, he must take it for granted that the tolerationhe spoke of was o f a very general nature

,the natural

stan d fo r a man to take who is being robbed andcannot help it. To justify oneself o n such a principleis to put a premium on shrewd dishonesty.

CHAPTER LXXXVII .

CONTUMELY.

TH E Eighth Commandment concerns itself withthe good name of the neighbor ; in a general way, itreproves all Sins of the tongue , apart from thosealready condemned by the Second and Sixthcommandments , that is to say, blasphemous and impurespeech. It is as a weapon against the neighbor andan instrument o f untruth that the tongue is hereconsidered .

By a good name is here intended the esteem inwhich a person is held by his fellow-men . Call itreputation

,character

,fame , renown, etc . , a. good name

means that the bearer is generally considered abovereproach in all matters of honesty

,moral integrity and

worth. It does n ot n ecessarily imply that such esteemis manifested exteriorly by what is technically knownas honor, the natural concomitant o f a good name ;it simply stands for the knowledge entertained byothers o f our respectability and our title to honor.

‘

A'

good name is therefore one thing ; honor is another.And honor consists precisely in that manifestation onthe part o f ou r fellows of the esteem and respectin which they hold us

,the fruit o f our good name ,

the homage rendered to virtue,dignity and merit. As

C ONTUM ELY . 27 1

it may therefore be easily seen, these two things— a

good name and honor— differ a s much as a sign differsfrom the thing signified .

The Eighth Commandment protects every man’shonor ; it condemns contumely which is an attackUpon that honor. Contumely is a Sign o f contemptwhich shows itself by attempting to impair the honoro n e duly receives ; it either strives to prevent thathonor being paid to the good name that naturallydeserves it, o r it tries to nullify it by offering just thecontrary, which is contumely, more commonly calledaffront, outrage , insult.

Now, contumely, as you will remark, does notseek primarily to deprive on e o f a good name ; whichit nearly always succeeds in doing, and this is calleddetraction ; but its obj ect is to prevent your goodname from getting its desert of respect, your charactersupposedly remaining intact. The insult offered isintended to effect this purpose . Again, all contumelypresupposes the presence of the party affronted ; theaffront is thrown in one’s fa ce, and therein consiststhe Shocking indecency o f the thing and its specificmalice .It must be remembered that anger, hatred, the

spirit of vengeance or any other passion does n ot

excuse o n e from the guilt o f contumely . On theother hand

,one’s culpability is not lessened by the

accidental fact o f one’s intended insu lts going wideof the mark and bearing no fruit o f dishonor to theperson assailed . To the ma lice of contumely may,and is often

,added that of defamation , if apart from

the dishonor received one’s character is besmirchedin the bargain . Contumely against parents offendsat the same time filial piety ; against God and Hissaints

,it is sacrilegious if provoked by the practice

o f religion and virtue , it is impious . If perpetratedin deed

,it may offend j ustice properly so called ; if it

occasion Sin in others, it is scandalous ; if it drive the

272 M ORAL BRIEFS.

victim to excesses of any kind, the gui lt thereof isshared by the contumelious agent.

Sometimes insult is offered gratuitously,as in the

case o f the weak, the old, the cripple and otherunfortunates who deserve pity rather than mockery ;the quality o f contumely of this sort is brutal andfiendish . Others will say for j ustification ' “But hesaid the same , he did the same to me. Can I not defendmyself '” That depends o n the sort o f defense youresort to . All weapons of defense are not lawful . Ifa man uses evil mean s to wrong you , there is n o

j ustification, in Christian ethics, for you to employthe same means in order to get square , o r even toshelter yourself from his abuse. The “eye-fo r -eye”

principle is n ot recognized among civilized andChristian peoples .This gross violation of personal respect may be

perpetrated in many ways any expression o f contempt,offered to your face, o r directed against you througha representative, is contumely . The usual way to dothis is to fling vile epithets , to call opprobrious names ,to make shameful charges . It is not always necessarythat such names and epithets be inapplicable o r suchcharges false , if, notwithstanding, the person inquestion has not thereby forfeited his right to respect.In certain circumstances , the epithet

“fool” may holdall the opprobriousness of contumely ' thief” and“drunkard” and others of a fouler nature may be thusmalicious fo r a better reason . An accusation o f

immorality in oneself o r in one’s parents iscontumelious in a high degree . Our mothers are afavorite target fo r the shafts of contumely that throughthem reach us . Abuse is n ot the only vehicle o f

contumely ; scorn, wa‘

nton ridicule , indecent mockeryand caricature that cover the unfortunate victim withShame and confusion serve the purpose as well . Tostrike o n e, to spit on on e an d other ignoble attacksand assaults belong to the same category o f crime.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

274 M ORAL BRIEFS.

destroy at the same time its fruit, which is honor.Thus / willbe seen the double malice o f defamation.

To defame therefore is to lessen o r to annulthe estimation in which a person is held by his fellowmen . This crime may be perpetrated in two differentmanners ' by making known his secret faults

, a nd

this is simple detraction ; and by ascribing to himfaults o f which he is innocent, and this is calumnyo r Slander. Thus it appears that a man’s charactermay suffer from truth as well as from falsehood.

Truth is an adorable thing, but it has its time andplace ; the fact o f its being truth does not preventit from being harmful . On the other hand, a lie ,which is evil in itself, becomes abominable when usedto malign a fellow-man .

There is‘

o n e mitigating and two aggravatingforms o f defamation . Gossip is small talk, idle andsufficiently discolored to make its subject appear inan unfavorable light . It takes a morbid pleasure inspeaking of the known and public faults o f an other.It picks at little things , and furnishes a steady o ccu

pation fo r people who have more time to mind otherpeople’s business than their own . It bespeaks smallness in intellectual make-up and general pusillanimity.

That is about all the harm there is in it, and that isenough .

Libel supposes a wide diffusion o f defamatorymatter

,written or spoken . Its malice is great because

o f its power fo r evil and harm . Tale-bearing o r backbiting is what the name implies . Its obj ect is principally to spread discord , to cause enmity, to breakup friendships ; it may have an ulterior purpose, andthese are the means it employs . No limit can be setto its capacity for evil , its malice is especially infernal .It is not necessary that what we do o r say of a

defamato ry nature result , as a matter o f fact, inbringing one’s name into disfavor o r disrepute ; itis sufficient that it be o f such a nature and have sucha tendency. If by accident the venomous shaft Spend

DEFAM ATION. 275

itself before attaining the intended mark, no creditis due therefore to him who shot it ; his guilt remainswhat it was when he sped it on its way . No r is therej ustification in the plea that no harm was meant, thatthe deed was done in a moment of anger, j ealousy,etc.

,that it was the result of loquacity, indulged in

for the simple pleasure o f talking. These are excusesthat excuse n ot.

There are those who, speaking in disparagemento f the neighbor, speak to the point, directly andplainly ; others , no less guilty, do it in a covert manner,have recourse to subterfuge and insinuation . Theyexaggerate faults and make them appear more odious ,they put an evil interpretation on the deed or intention ;they keep back facts that would improve the situation ;they remain silent when silence is condemnatory ; theypraise with a malignant praise . A mean, sarcasticsmile o r a significant reticence often does the workbetter than many words and phrases . And all this , aswe have said

,independently o f the truth o r falsehood

o f the impression conveyed .

Listeners share the guilt o f the defamers on theprinciple that the receiver is as bad as the thief. Thissupposes o f course that you listen

,not merely hear ;

that yo u enjoy this sort o f a thing and are Willing andready to receive the impression derogatory to theneighbor

’

s esteem and good name . Of course,if mere

curiosity makes us listen and ou r pleasure and amusement are less at the expense o f the neighbor’s goodn ame than excited by the style o f the narrator o r thesingularity o f the facts alleged

,the fault is less ; but

fault there nevertheless is,since such an attitude serves

to encourage the traducer and helps him drive hispoints home . Many sin who could and should preventexcesses of this kind , but refrain from doing so ;their sin is greater if

,by reason o f their position

,

they are under greater obligations o f correction .

Although reputation is a priceless boon to allmen , there are cases wherein it has an especial value

276 M ORAL BRIEFS.

o n account of the peculiar circumstan ces o f a man’sposition . It not infrequently happens that the wholeSuccess of a man’s life depends o n his good name .Men in public life , in the professions, religious andothers similiarly placed, suffer from defamation farmore than those in the ordinary walks of life ; andna turally those who injure them are guilty of moregrievous wrong. And it goes without saying that aman can stand an immoral aspersion better than a

woman . In all cases the malice is measured by theinjury done o r intended.

CHAPTER LXXXIX .

DETRA CTION .

To ABSOLVE oneself o f the sin of detraction o n

the ground that nothing but the truth was spokenis

,as we have seen, o n e way of getting around a

difficulty that is no way at all . Some excuses arebetter than none

,others are not . It is precisely the

truth o f such talk that makes it detraction if it weren ot true, it would not be detraction but calumnyanother and a very different fault . It would be wellfor such people to reflect for a moment, and askthemselves if their own character would stand thestrain o f having their secret sins and failings sub

jected to public criticism and censure , their privateshortcomings heralded from every housetop . Wouldthey, o r would they not, consider themselves injuredby such revelations ' Then it would be in order fo rthem to use the same rule and measure in dealingwith others .He who does mo ral evil offends in the sight o f

God and forfeits God’s esteem an d friendship. But

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

278 M ORAL BRIEFS.

o f his evil ways , justice may n ot be o ffended, butcharity may be, and grievously . It is a sin, anuncharity, to harp on one’s faults in a spirit o f spite,o r with the cruel desire to maintain his dishonor ;to leave no stone unturned in order to thoroughlyblacken his name . In doing this you sin againstcharity, because you do something you would n ot

wish to have done unto you . Justice itself wouldbe violated if

,even in the event o f the facts related

being notorious, you speak o f them to people whoignore them and are not likely ever to come to aknowledge of them .

If you add, after telling all you know about apoor devil, that he did penance and repaired his sin,you must not imagine that such atonement willrehabilitate him in the minds of all . Men are moresevere and unforgiving than God. Grace may berecovered, but reputation is a thing which, once lost,is usually lost fo r good . Something o f the infamysticks ; tears and good works will not, cannot washit away. He, therefore, who banks too much on humanmagnanimity is apt to err ; and his erring constitutes afault.

But I confided the secret to but o n e person ;and that on e a dear friend, who promised to keep it .

”

Yes, but the injured party has a right to the estimation of that on e person, and his injury consistsprecisely in being deprived o f it . Besides, youaccuse yourself openly. Either what you said wasvoid of all harm, o r it was not. In the on e case ,why impose silence' In the other, why not beginyourself by Observing the silence you impose uponothers' Your friend will do what you did, and theball you set rolling will not stop until there is nothingleft o f your victim’s character.

Of course there are times when to speak o f

another’s faults is derogatory neither to justice norto charity ; both may demand that the evil be r e

vealed . A man to defend himself may expose his

DETRACTION.

accuser’s crookedness ; in court his lawyer may doit for him

,for here again charity begins at home . In

the interests o f the delinquent, to effect his correction,o n e may reveal his shortcomings to those who haveauthority to correct. And it is even admitted thata person in trouble o f any kind may without sin ,for the purpose o f obtaining advice o r consolation,speak to a j udicious friend o f another

’s evil ways .

Zeal fo r the public good may n ot only excuse ,but even require that the true character o f a badman be shown up and publicly censured . Its objectis to prevent o r undo evil , to protect the innocent ;it is intended to destroy an evil influence and to makehypocrisy fly under his own colors . Immoral writers ,living o r dead, corrupt politicians and demagogues ,unconscionable wretches who prey o n public ignorance,may and should be , made known to the people,to shield them is to share their guilt . This shouldnot be done in a spirit o f vengeance , but for thesole purpose o f guarding the unwary against vultureswho know no law , and who thrive on the simplicityo f their hearers .

CHAPTER XC.

CALUMNY.

To THE malice o f detraction calumny adds that offalsehood . It is a lie, which is bad ; it is a report prejudicial to the cha racter o f another

,which is worse

it is both combined, out o f which combination springs

a third malice, which is abominable . All the moreso , since there can exist no excuse o r reason inthe light o f which this sin may appear as a human

280 M ORAL BRIEFS.

weakness . Because slander is the fruit of deliberatecriminal spite, j ealousy and revenge , it has a character of diabolism . The

,calumniator is not only a

moral assassin , but he is the most accomplished typeo f the coward known to man . If the devil loves acheerful liar, he has on e here to satisfy his affections .This crime is one that can never be tolerated, no

matter what the circumstances ; it can never be justified on any grounds whatsoever ; it is in str in sicallyevil

,a sin of inj ustice that admits no mitigation . When

slander is sworn to before the courts, it acquires afourth malice

,that of irreligion, a n d is called false

testimony . It is not alone perjury, for perjury doesn ot necessarily attack the neighbor’s good name ; it isperj ured calumny

,a crime that deserves all the r eprO a

bation it receives in this world— and in the next .To lie outright, deliberately and with malice

a forethought, in traducing a fellow-man, is slanderin its direct form but such conditions are notrequired to constitute a real fault of calumny. Itis not necessary to be certain that what you allegeagainst your neighbor be false ; it is sufficient that yoube uncertain if it be true . An unsubstantiated chargeo r accusation , a mere rumor given out as worthy o f

belief, a suspicion o r doubt clothed so as to appeara certainty, these contain all the malice and all theelements o f slander clearly characterized . Char ity,justice and truth alike are violated

,guilt is there in

unquestioned evidence . Whatever subterfuge,equiv

o cation o r other crooked proceeding be resorted to, ifmendacity in any form is a feature o f the aspersionswe cast upon the neighbor

,we sin by calumny, purely

an d simply.

Some excuse themselves o n the plea that whatthey say, they give out for what it is worth ; theyheard it from others , and take no responsibility as toits truth o r falsehood . But here we must considerthe credulity o f the hearers . Will they believe it ,whether you do o r not ' Are they likely to receive

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

282 M ORAL BRIEFS.

crime it is sufficient so to manipulate your wordstha t suspicion may fall on any o n e o f said class o r

community. If the charge be particularly heinous , o ri f the body of men be such that all its usefulnessdepends on its reputation , as is the case especiallywith religious bodies, the malice of such slanderacquires a dignity far above the ordinary.

The Church o f God has suffered more in the longcenturies of her existence from the tongue o f slanderthan from sword and flame and chains combined . Inthe mind o f her enemies , any weapon is lawful withwhich to smite her

,and the climax o f infamy is reached

when they affirm,to justify their dishonesty, that they

turn Rome’s weapons against her. There is only on e

answer to this,and that is the silence of contempt .

Slander and dollars are the wheels on which moves thepropaganda that would substitute Gospel Christianityfor the superstitions o fRome . It is slander that vilifiesin convention and synod the friars who did more fo rpure Christianity in the Philippines in a hundredyears than the whole nest o f their revilers will do inten thousand . It is slander tha t holds up to publicridicule the congregations that suffer persecution andexile in France in the name of liberty

,fraternity, etc.

It IS slander that the long-tailed missionary with thesanctimonious face brings back from the countries ofthe South with which to regale the minds o f those whofurnish the Bibles and shekels . And who will measurethe slander tha t grows out o f the dunghill o f Protestantign orance of what Catholics really believe'

CHAPTER XCI

RASH JUDGMENT.

TH E Eighth Commandment is based on the naturalright every fellow-man has to ou r good opinion , unlesshe forfeits it justly and publicly . It forbids all injuryto his reputation, first, in the estimation o f others ,which is done by calumny and detraction secondly,in our own estimation, and this is done by rash j udgment

,by hastily and without sufficient grounds think

ing evil o f him ,forming a bad opinion o f him . He

may be , as he has a right to be, anxious to stand wellin our esteem as well as in the esteem o f others .

A j udgment, rash o r otherwise, is not a doubt,neither is it a suspicion . Everybody knows what adoubt is . When I doubt if another is doing o r hasdone wrong, the idea o f his o r her guilt simply entersmy mind, occurs to me and I turn it over and around ,from on e side to another, without being sa tisfied toaccept or rej ect it. I do not say ' yes

,it is true ;

neither do I say ' n o , it is not true . I say nothing, Ipass n o j udgment ; I suspend fo r the moment alljudgment, I doubt.

A doubt is n ot evil unless there be absolutely noreason fo r doubting, and then the doubt is born o f

passion and malice . And the evil , whatever there isof it, is not in the doubt

’s entering our mindsomething beyond our control ; but In ou r entertainingthe doubt, in ou r making the doubt personal

,which

supposes an act o f the will .Stronger than doubt

'

IS suspicion . When I suspecton e, I do n ot keep the balance perfectly even betweenyes and n o

, as in the case o f doubt ; I lean mentallyto o n e side , but do not go so far as to assen t on e way

284 M ORAL BRIEFS.

o r the other. Having before me a person who excitesmy suspicion, I am inclined to think him guilty oncertain evidence, but I fear to judge lest I should bein error, because there is evidence also of innocence .If my suspicion is based on good grounds, it is na turaland lawful ; otherwise it is rash and sinful ; it isuncharitable and unjust to the person suspected. Asuspicion often hurts more than an accusation .

Doubt and suspicion,when rash, are sinful ; but

the malice thereof is not grave unless they are soutterly unfounded as to betoken deep-seated antipathyand aversion and a perverse will ; o r unless in peculiarcircumstances the position of the person is such as tomake the suspicion gravely injurious and not easilycondoned . There is guilt in keeping that suspicionto oneself ; to give it out in words is calumny

,

whether it be true o r not,Simply because it is

unfounded .

I

In a judgment there is neither doubt norsuspicion ; I make my own the idea presented to mymind . The balance of assent, in which is weighed,the evidence for and against, is not kept even, nor isit partially inclined ; it goes down with its full weight,and the party under consideration stands convictedbefore the tribunal o f my judgment. I do n ot say, Iwonder if he is guilty ; nor he most likely is guilty ;but ' he is guilty— here is a deliberate judgment.Henceforth my esteem ceases for such a person .

Translated in words such a judgment is not calumnybecause it is supposedly founded in reason ; but it isdetraction

,because it is injurious .

Such a judgment, without any exterior expression ,is sinful if it is rash . And what makes it rash' Theinsufficiency o f motive on which it is based . Andwhence comes the knowledge o f such sufficiency orinsufficiency of motive' From the intelligence , butmostly from the conscience . That is why manyunintelligent people judge rashly and sin not , becausethey know n o better. But conscience nearly always

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

286 M ORAL BRIEFS.

are n ot obliged to close our eyes to the truth of facts,and 1t is on facts that our judgments are formed.

CHAPTER XCII .

M'ENDACITY.

To LIE is to utter an untruth , with full knowledgethat it is an untruth . The untruth may be expressedby any conventional Sign , by word, deed , gesture, o r

even by silence . Its malice and disorder consists inthe opposition that exists between our idea and theexpression we give to it ; our words convey a meaningcontrary to what is in ou r mind ; we say on e thingand mean another. If we unwittingly utter what iscontrary to fact, that is error ; if we so clumsilytranslate ou r thoughts as to give a false impressiono f what we mean, and we do the best we can, that isa blunder ; if in a moment o f listlessness and inattentionwe speak in a manner that conflicts with o u r state o fmind, that is tempora ry mental aberration . But if weknowingly give o ut as truth what we know is notthe truth

,we lie purely and simply .

In misrepresentations o f this kind it is notrequired that there be a plainly formulated purposeo f deceiving another ; an implicit intention, adisposition to allow our words to run their naturalcourse , is sufficient to give such utterances a charactero f mendacity. For, independently o f ou r mentalattitude, it is in the nature of a lie to deceive ; anintention, o r rather a pretense to the contrary

,does

not affect that nature . The fact o f lying presupposesthat we intend in some manner to practise deception ;if we did n ot have such a. purpose we would not resortto lying. If you stick a knife into a man , you may

MENDACITY. 287

pretend what you like, but you did certainly intend tohurt him and make him feel badly.

Nor has any ulterior motive we may have in tellingan untruth the power to change its nature ; a lie is a

lie,no matter what prompted it. Whether it serves

the purpose o f amusement, as a j ocose lie ; o r helps togain us an advantage o r get us out of trouble, as anofficious lie ; o r inj ures another in any way, as apernicious lie ' mendacity is the character of our

utterances,the guilt o f willful falsehood is o n our

soul . A restriction should, however, be made in favoro f the j ocose lie ; it ceases to be a lie when the mlndof the speaker is Open to all who listen and 1118

narration o r statement may be likened to those fablesand myths and fairy tales in which is exemplified thecharm of figurative language . When a person sayswhat is false and is convinced that allwho hear himknow it is false

,the contradiction between his mind

and its expression is said to be material, and n ot

formal ; and in this the essence o f a lie does n ot consist.A lie is always a Sin ; it is what is called an

intrinsic evil and is therefore always wrong. Andwhy is this ' Because speech was given us to expressou r thoughts ; to use this faculty therefore fo r acontrary purpose is against its nature , against a lawo f our being, and this is evil . The obnoxiousconsequences o f falsehood, as it i s patent to all , constitute an evil for which falsehood is responsible . Butdeception, on e o f those consequences , is n ot in itselfand essentially, a moral fault . Deception

,if not

practised by lying and therefore not intended butSimply suffered to occur, and if there be grave reasonfo r resorting to this means o f defense , cannot be putdown as a thing offensive to God o r unjustlyprejudicial to the neighbor. But when deception isthe effect o fmendacity

,it assumes a character o fmalice

that deserves the reprobation of man as it is condemnedby God. And this is another reason why lying isessentially an evil thing

,and can never

,under any

circumstances be allowed o r j ustified .

288 M ORAL BRIEFS.

This does not mean tha t lying is always a morta lsin. In fact, it is oftener venial than morta l . Itbecomes a serious fault only in the event of anothermalice being added to it. Thus, if I lie to on e whohas a right to know the truth and for grave reasons ;if the mendacious information I impart is o f a natureto mislead o n e into injury o r loss

,and this thing I

do maliciously ; or if my lying is directly disparagingto another ; in these cases there is grave malice andserious guilt. But if there is no injustice resultingfrom a lie , I prevaricate against right in lying, butmy sin is not a serious offense .This is a vice that certainly deserves to be fought

against and punished always and in all places,

especially in the young who are so prone thereto,first

because it is a sin ; and again , because of the socialevils that it gives rise to. There is no gainsaying thefact that in the code of purely human morals , lying isconsidered a very heinous offense that ostracizes aman when robbery on a large scale , adultery and otherfir st-degree misdemeanors leave him perfectlyhonorable . This recalls an instance o f a recent courtroom. A young miscreant thoroughly imbued withpharisai c morals met with a bold face, without a blushor a flinch

,accusations of misconduct , robbery and

murder ; but when charged with being a liar, he sprangat his accuser in open court and tried to throttle him .

His fine indignation got the best o f him ; he couldn ot stand that .

Among pious-minded people two extreme errorsare n ot infrequently met with . The o n e is that a lieis n ot wrong unless the neighbor suffers thereby ; thefalsity o f this we have already shown . According tothe other

,a lie is such an evil that it should n ot be

tolerated,not one lie

,even if all the souls in hell were

thereby to be liberated . T0 this we answer that wewould like to get such a chance once ; we fear wewould tell a Whopper . It would be wicked , o f course ;but we might expect leniency from the just Judgeunder the circumstances .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

290 M ORAL BR IEFS.

But it must be understood that such practicesmust be j ustified by the circumstances . They supposein him who resorts thereto a right to withhold information that overrides the right of his interrogator. Ifthe right of the latter to know is superior, then thehiding of truth would constitute an injustice, whichis sinful

,and this is considered tantamount to lying.

And if the mean s to which we resort is not lying, aswe have defined it, that is, does not Show a contradiction between what we say and what we mean, thenthere can be n o fear o f evil on any side .

Now, suppose that instead o f using a termwhose signification is contrary to what my mindconceives , which would be falsehood, I employ aword that h as a natural double meaning

, o n e o f

which is conform to my mind,the other at variance .

In the first place, I do not speak against my mind ;I say wha t I think ; the word I use means what I mean .

But the other fellow 'that is another matter. He maytake his choice of the two meanings . If he guessesaright, my artifice has failed ; if he is deceived, that ishis loss . I do him no injustice, fo r he had no rightto question me . If my answer embarrasses him, thatis just what I intended, and I am guilty o f no evil forthat ; if it deceives him that I did not intend butwillingly suffer ; I am not obliged to enter intoexplanations when I am not even bound to answer him .

Of the deception,he alone is the cause ; I am the

occa sion , if you will , but the circumstances o f hisinquisitiveness made that occasion necessary, and Iam not responsible .

This a rtifice is called equivocation or amphibologyit consists in the use of words that have a naturaldouble meaning ; it supposes in him who resorts to itthe right to conceal the truth

,a right superior to that

o f the tormentor who questions him . When theseconditions are fulfilled

,recourse to this method is

perfectly legitimate,but the conditions must be

CONCEALING THE TRUTH . 291

fulfilled.This is not a weapon for convenience , but

fo r necessity. It is easy to deceive oneself when 1t

is painful to tell the truth . Therefore it should beused sparingly ' it is n ot fo r every-day use, onlyemergencies o f a serious nature can j ustify its employ.

Another artifice,still more delicate and dangerous ,

but just as legitimate when certain conditions arefulfilled

,is what is known as mental restriction . This

too consists in the employ o f words of double meaning ;but whereas in the former case, both meanings arenaturally contained in the word, here the termemployed has but one natural signification , the otherbeing furnished by circumstances . Its legitimate usesupposes that he to whom the term is directed shouldeither in fact know the circumstances o f the casethat have this peculiar significance , o r that he couldand should know them . If the information drawnfrom the answer received is insufficient, so much thebetter ; if he is misinformed, the fault is his own, Sinceneither genuine falsehood nor evident injustice can beattributed to the other.

An example will illustrate this better thananything else . Take a physician o r lawyer

,the

custodian o f a professional secret, o r a priest withknowledge safeguarded by the seal o f the confessional.These men either may n ot o r should not reveal toothers unconcerned in the matter the knowledge theypossess . There is n o on e but should be aware of this ,but should know that when they are questioned

,they

will answer as laymen,and n ot as professionals . They

will answer according to outside information,yes or

no , whether on not such conclusion agree with thefac ts they obtained under promise of secrecy. Theysimply put out o f their mind as unserviceable allprofessional knowledge , and respond as a man to aman . Their standing as professional men puts everyquestioner o n his guard and admonishes him that n oprivate information need be expected , that he musttake the answer given as the conclusion of outside

292 M ORAL BRIEFS.

evidence, then if he is deceived he has no on e to blamebut himself, Since he was warned and took n o heed ofthe warning.

Again we repeat, the margin between mentalrestriction and falsehood is a safe, but narrow one ,the least bungling may merge on e into the other. Itrequires tact and j udgment to know when it ispermissible to have recourse to this artifice and howto practise it safely. It is not a thing to be tr ifled with .

In only rare circumstances can it be employed,and only

few person s have the right to employ it.

CHAPTER XCIV.

RESTITUTION .

2A PECULIAR feature attaches to the sins we haverecently treated, against the Fifth, S ixth , Seventh, andEighth commandments . These offenses differ fromothers in that they involve an inj ury

,an injustice to

our fellow-man. Now,the condition of pardon for

sin is contrition this contrition contains essentiallya firm purpose that looks to the future, a n d removesin a measure , the liability to fall again . But with thesins here in question that firm purpose not only looksforward , but backward as well , n ot only guaranteesagainst future ill-doing, but also repairs the wrongcriminally effected in the past . This is calledrestitution , the undoing o f wrong suffered by ou r

neighbor through our own fault . The firm purposeto make restitution is just as essential to contrition asthe firm purpose to sin no more ; in fact, the formeris only a form o f the latter . It means that we willnot sin an y more by prolonging a culpable injustice .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

294 M ORAL BRIEFS.

We deem it unnecessary to dwell upon thegravity o f the obligation to make restitution. Thebalance o f justice must be maintained exact andimpartial in this world

, o r the Almighty will see thatit is done in the next. The idea that God does notstand fo r j ustice destroys the idea that God exists .And if the precept n ot to commit inj ustice leaves theguilty o n e free to repair o r not to repair, that preceptis self-contradictory an d has no meaning at all . Ifa right is a right , it is not extinguished by beingviolated and if justice is something more than a meresound

,it must protect all rights whether sinned

against or not.It might be convenient for some people to force

upon their conscience the lie that restitution is o f

counsel rather than of precept, under the plea that it isenough to shoulder the responsibility of sin withoutbeing burdened with the obligation o f repairing it, butit is only a soul well steeped in malice tha t will takeseriously such a contention . Neither is restitution apenance imposed upon us in order to atone for ou rfaults ; it is no more penitential in its nature than arethe efforts we make to avoid the faults we have falleninto in the past . It atones fo r n othing ; it is simplya desisting from evil . When this is done an d forgiveness obtained, then , and not till then, is it time to thinkof satisfying fo r the temporal punishment due to sin .

Naturally it is much more easy to abstain fromcommitting injustice than to repair it after it is done.It is often very difficult and very painful to face theconsequences o f ou r evil ways , especially when allsa tisfaction is gone and nothing remains but the hardexigencies o f duty. And duty is a thing that it costsvery little to Shirk when o n e is already hardened by ahabit o f injustice . That is why restitution is so littleheard of in the world . It is a fact to be noted that theCatholic Church is the only religious body that daresto enforce strictly the law o f reparation . Othersvaguely hold it, but rarely teach it, and then only in

RESTITUTION . 295

flagrant cases of fraud . But she allows none o f herchildren to approach the sacraments who has notalready repaired

, o r who does n o t promise in allsincerity to repair, wha tever wrong he may have doneto the neighbor. Employers o f Catholic help sometimes feel the effects of this uncompromising attitudeof the Church ; they are astonished , edified andgrateful .We recall with pleasure an incident of an apostate

going about warning people against the turpitudes ofRome and especially against the extortions o f herpriests through the confessional . He explained howthe benighted papist was obliged under pain o f eternaldamnation to confess his sins to the priest, and thenwas charged so much for each fault he had been guiltyo f. An incredulous listener wanted to know if he , thespeaker, while in the toils o f Rome had ever beenobliged thus to disgorge in the confessiona l , and wasanswered with a triumphant affirmation . At whichthe wag hinted that it would be a good thing not tobe too outspoken in announcing the fact as his reputation fo r honesty would be likely to suffer thereby

,fo r

he knew , and all Catholics knew,who were those

whose purse the confessor pries open .

CHAPTER XCV.

UNDOING THE EVIL.

WHENEVER a person, through a spirit of maliceo r grossly culpable negligence

,becomes responsible

fo r serious bodily injury sustained by another, he isbound , as far as in him lies , to undo the wrong andrepair the inj ustice committed . The law of personal

296 M ORAL BRIEFS.

rights that forbade him to lay violent hands on another,n ow commands that the evil be removed by him who

placed it. True, physica l pain and tortures cannotbe repaired in kind ; physical inj ury and disability ar e

not always susceptible o f adequate reparation . Butthere is the loss incurred as a result of such disability,an d this loss may affect, n ot o n e alone, but many .

Death, too, is of course absolutely irreparable.But the killing of the victim in nowise extinguishesthe obligation o f reparation . The principal object isremoved ; but there remain the loss o f wages, theexpenses necessitated by illness and death ; there maybe a family dependent on the daily toil o f theunfortunate and made destitute by his removal . Onemust be blind indeed not to see that all these lossesare laid at the door of the criminal , a direct result o fhis crime

,foreseen

,too

,at least confusedly, since there

is a moral fault ; and these must be made good, as faras the thing is possible, otherwise the sin will n ot beforgiven .

S lander must be retracted . If you have lied aboutanother and thereby done him an injury

,you are bound

in conscience to correct your false statement,to correct

it in such a manner as to undeceive all whom youmay have misled. This retraction must really retract,and n ot do just the contrary, make the last state o f

things worse than the first, which is sometimes thecase .

_ Prudence an_d tact should suggest means to dothis effectively 'when

,how and to what extent it

should be done , in order that the best results of reparation may be obtained . But in on e way o r another

,

j ustice demands that the slanderer contradict his lyingimputations and remove by so doing the stain thatbesmirches the character o f his victim.

Of course, if it was by truth an d not falsehood ,by detraction and not calumny

,that you assailed and

injured the reputation o f another, there is no gainsaying the truth ; you are not justified in lying in orderto make truth less damaging. The harm done here is

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

298 M ORAL BRIEFS.

repair at least in part the grave inj ustice under whichhis victim labors .If both share the guilt, then both must share the

burden . If on e shirks, the other must assume theWhole . The great victim is the child . That child mustget a Christian bringing-up, o r some on e will sufferfo r it ; its faith must be safeguarded . If this cannotbe done at home, then it must be placed where thiscan be done . If it is advantageous for the parent o rparents that their offspring be raised in ignorance o fits origin

,it is far more advantageous for the child

itself. Let it be confided to good hands , but let themoney necessary fo r its support be forthcoming, sincethis is the only way to make reparation for the evilof its birth .

I would add a word in regar d to the injustice ,frequent enough

, o f too long deferring the fulfilment ofmarriage promises . F o r one party , especially, thisperiod o f waiting is precarious , fraught with dangerand dangerous possibilities . Her fidelity makes hersacrifice all other opportunities

,and makes her future

happiness depend o n the fulfilment o f the promisegiven . Cha rms do not last forever ; attractions fadewith the years . If affection cools

,she is helpless to

stir up the embers without unmentionable sacrifice.There is the peril . The man who is responsible for it,is responsible fo r a good deal . He is committing aninjustice ; there is danger of his not being willing torepair it, danger that he may not be able to repair it.His line o f duty is clear. Unless for reasons of thegravest importan ce , he cannot in surety of consciencecontinue in a line o f conduct that is repugn ant aliketo natural reason and common decency

,and that

smacks o f moral make-up that would not bear thescrutiny of close investigation .

CHAPTER XCVI .

PAYING BACK.

A M A N who has stolen , has nothing more urgentand imperative to perform , o n this side o f eternity,than the duty o f refunding the money o r goods unjustlyacquired

, o r the value thereof. He may possibly con

sider something else more important ; but if he does ,that man has somehow unlearned the first principles ofnatural honesty

,ignores the fundamental law that

governs the universe,and he will have a difficult time

convincing the Almighty that this ignorance o f his isn ot wholly culpable . The best and only thing for himto do 13 to make up his mind to pay up , to disgorge hisill-gotten goods

, to make good the losses sustainedb y his neighbor through his fault.

He may, o r may not, have profited to any greatextent by his criminal proceedings ; but there is n o

doubt that his victim suffered injustice ; an d thatprecisely is the root o f his obligation . The stolen goodsmay have perished in his hands and he have nothing toshow ; the same must be said o f the victim the momenthis possessions disappeared ; with this difference , however, that j ustice was not violated in on e case , and inthe other, it was . The lawful owner may be dead , orunfin dable among the living ; but wherever he may be ,he never intended that the thief should enjoy the fruito f his crime . The latter’5 title

,vitiated 1n its source ,

cannot be improved by any circumstance of the owner’swhereabouts . No o n e may thrive on one’s own dishonesty.

You say this is hard ; and In so saying, you lend

testimony to the truth of the axiom that honesty isthe best policy. There is no on e but will agree with

300 M ORAL BRIEFS.

you ; but such a statement, true though it be, helpsmatters very little . It is always hard to do right ;blame Adam and Eve for it, and think o f somethingmore practicable . But must I impoverish myself '

Not to the extent of depriving yourself o f thenecessaries o f life . But you must deprive yourself tothe extent o f settling your little account, even if yousuffer something thereby. But how shall I be able torefund it all ' You may never be able to refund it all ;but you may start in immediately and do the best youcan ; resolve to keep at it ; never revoke your purposeto cancel the debt. In case your lease o f life expiresbefore full justice is done , the Almighty may take intoconsideration your motives and opportunities . Theydo say that hell is paved with good intentions ; butthese intentions are of the sort that are satisfied withnever coming to a state o f realization.

But I shall lose my position,be disgraced,

prosecuted and imprisoned . This might happen if youwere to write out a brief of your crime and send thesame, signed and sworn to , to your employer. Butthis is superfluous . You might omit the details andsignature, enclose the sum and trust luck for the rest .Or you might consult your spiritual adviser ; he mighthave had some experience in this line o f business .The essential is n ot that you be found out, but thatyou refund .

It may happen that several are concerned in atheft. In this case, each and every participant, inthe measure o f his guilt, is bound to make restitution .

Guilt is the object , restitution is the shadow ; thefollowing is fatal . To order or advise the thing doneto influence efficaciously its doing ; to assist in the deedo r to profit knowingly thereby, to shield criminally theculprit

,etc . , this sort o f co -Operation adds to the guilt

of sin the burden of restitution . Si lence o r inaction ,when plain duty would call for words and deeds toprevent crime, incriminates as well as active participation

,and creates an obligation to repair.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CHAPTER XCVII .

GETTING RID OF ILL-GOTTEN GOODS .

IT M AY happen that a person discover among hislegitimately acquired possessions something that doesn ot in reality belong to him . He may have come by itthrough purchase , donation, etc . ; he kept it in goodfaith

,thinking that he had a clear title to it. He n ow

finds that there was an error somewhere, and that itis the property o f some o n e else. Of course, he is notthe lawful owner, and does not become such by virtueo f his good faith ; although , in certain given circumstances , i f the good faith, o r ignorance o f error, lastlong enough, a title may be acquired by prescription,and the possessor become the lawful owner . But weare not considering the question of prescription.

It is evident, then , that our friend must dispossesshimself in favo r o f the real owner, as soon as the lattercomes upon the scene and proves his claim. But thepossessor may in all innocence have alienated thegoods , destroyed o r consumed them ; or they may haveperished through accident or fatality. In the lattercase, nothing remains to refund, no o n e is to blame ,and the owner must bear the loss . Even in the formercase , if the holder can say in conscience that he innowise became richer by the possession and use o f thegoods in question, he is not bound to make restitution .

If, however,‘

there be considerable profits, they rightlybelong to the owner, and the possesso r must refundthe same .But the question arises as to how the holder is to

be compensated for the expenditure made in thebeginning and in good faith when he purchased thegoods which he is n ow obliged to hand over to another.

GETTING R ID OF IL L -GOTTEN GOODS . 303

Impartial justice demands that when the rightful ownerclaims his goods , the holder relinquish them, and hemay take what he gets, even if it be nothing. Hemight claim a compensation if he purchased what heknew to be another’s property, acting in the interestso f that other and with the in ten tlon o f returning thesame to its owner. Otherwise, his claim is againstthe on e from whom he obtained the article, and notagainst him to whom he is obliged to turn it over.He may, if he be shrewd enough, anticipate the

serving o f the owner’s claim and secure himself againsta possible loss by selling back fo r a consideration thegoods in question to the o n e from whom he boughtthem . But this cannot be done after the claim ispresented ; besides , this proceeding must not render itimpossible fo r the owner to recover his property ;and he must be notified as to the whereabouts of saidproperty. This manoeuvre works injustice unto noo n e. The owner stands in the same relation to hisproperty as formerly ; the subsequent holder assumesan obligation that was always his , to refund the goodso r their value, with recourse against the antecedentseller.The moment a person shirks the r espon sibility fof

refunding the possessions,by him legitimately acquired,

but belonging rightfully to another, that personbecomes a possessor in bad faith and stands towardsthe rightful owner in the position of a thief. Not ina thousand years will he be able to prescribe a justtitle to the goods . The burden o f restitution willforever remain on him ; if the goods perish , no matterhow, he must make good the loss to the owner. Hemust also disburse the sum total o f profits gatheredfrom the illegal use of said goods . If values fluctuateduring the interval o f criminal possession

,he must

compute the amount o f his debt according to the valuesthat prevailed at the time the lawful owner wouldhave disposed of his goods

,had he retained possession .

304 M ORAL BRIEFS.

Finally, there may be a doubt as to whether theobj ect I possess is rightfully mine o r n ot. I must domy best to solve that doubt and clear the title to

ownership . If I fail , I may consider the obj ect mineand may use it as such . If the owner turn up afterthe prescribed time, so much the worse for the owner.An uncertainty may exist, not as to my proprietorship ,but as to whom the thing does belong. If mypossession began in good faith and I am unable todetermine the ownership , I may consider myself theowner until further developments shed more light onthe matter.It is different when the obj ect was originally

acquired in bad faith. In such a case,

first, the illgotten goods can never be mine ; theri, there is nosanction in reason , conscience or law fo r the conducto f those who run immediately to the first charitableinstitution and leave there their conscience moneyo r who have masses said fo r the repose of the soulso f those who have been defrauded, before they aredead at all perhaps . My first care must be to locatethe victim ; o r , if he he certainly deceased o r evidentlybeyond reach, the heirs of the victim o f my fraud.

When all means fail and I am unable to find eitherthe owner o r his heirs , then , and not till then, may Idispose o f the goods in question . I must assume insuch a contingency as this , that the will o f the ownerwould be to expend the sum o n the most worthy cause ;and that is charity. The only choice then that remainswith me is

,what hospital, asylum or other enterprise

o f charity is to profit by my sins , Since I myself cannotbe a gainer in the premises .It might be well to remark here that one is not

obliged to make restitution fo r more than the damagescall for . Earnestness is a good Sign , but it should n otblind us o r drive us to an excess of zeal detrimentalto ou r own lawful interests . When there is a reasonableand insolvable doubt as to the amount o f reparationto be made , it is just that such a doubt favor us . If

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

306 M ORAL BRIEFS.

cannot extract blood from a beet, n o r shekels from anempty purse. Then a man may lose all his belongingsin a catastrophe, and after striving by labor andeconomy to pay o ff his debts , may see himself obligedto give up the task through sickness , misfortune o r

other good causes . He has given all he has , he cannotgive more . Even though liabilities were stacked upmountain-high against him , he cannot be held morallyresponsible, and his creditors must attribute theirlosses to the misfortune o f life— ~a rather un substantial consolation, but as good a one as the poor debtorhas .There are other cases where the obligations o f

restitution are n ot annulled, but only cancelled fo r thetime being

,until such a time as circumstances permit

their being met without grave disaster to the debtor.The latter may be in such a position that extreme, o rgreat

,want would stare him in the face, if he parted

with what he possesses to make restitution . Thedifficulty here is out of all proportion with the injusticecommitted fo r , after all, o n e must live, and

,

charitybegins at home , our first duty is toward ourselves .The creditors o f this man have n o just claim againsthim until he improves his circumstances ; in the meantime , the burden o f responsibility is lifted from hisShoulders .The same must be said when the paying o ff o f a

debt at any particular time,be it long o r short

,would

cripple a man’s finances , wipe out his earnings tosuch an extent as to make him fall considerably belowhis present position in life . We might take a caseduring the late coal famine, of a man who, in orderto fill his contracts o f coal at six dollars a ton , wouldbe obliged to buy it at fifteen and twenty dollars aton ; and thereby sacrifice his fortune . The thingcould not be expected , it is preposterous . Hisobligee must wait and hope for better times .

A man’s family is a part of himself. Thereforethe payment o f a just debt may be deferred in order

WHAT EXCUSES F ROM RE STITUT ION . 307

to shield from want parents , wife, children , brotherso r sisters . Life , limb and reputation are greaterpossessions than riches ; consequently, rather thanj eopardize these, on e may, for the time, put aside hlSobligations to make restitution .

All this supposes , o f course, that during theinterval o f delay the creditor does not suffer in c

’

on

ven ien ces greater than , o r as great as , those the debtorseeks to avoid . The latter’s right to defer paymentceases to exist the moment it comes into conflict withan equal right o f the former to said payment. It isagainst reason to expect that, after suffering a firstinjustice , the victim should suffer a second in orderto spare the guilty party a lesser or an equal injury .

Preference therefore must be given to the creditorover the debtor when the necessity for sacrifice isequal, and leniency must be

'

refused when it becomescruelty to the former.

Outside these circumstances, which are rareindeed, it will be seen at once that the creditor mayact an unjust part in pressing claims that accidentallyand temporarily become invalid . He has a right to hisown , but he is n ot justified in vindicating that right

,

if in so doing, he inflicts more damage than equitycalls fo r . The culprit has a right not to suffer morethan he deserves , and it is mock justice that does n otrespect that right . If the creditor does suffer someloss by the delay, this might be a circumstance toremember at the final settlement but fo r the present

,

there is an impediment to the working of justice,placed by the fatal order o f things and it is beyondpower to remove it.

CHAPTER XCIX .

DEBTS .

BEFORE closing our remarks , necessarily brief andincomplete

, o n this subject, so vast and comprehensive,we desire in a few words to pay ou r respects to thatparticular form o f injustice, more common perhapsthan all others combined, which is known as criminaldebt , likewise , to its agent, the most brazen impostorand unconscionable fraud that afflicts society, the manwho owes and will n ot pay. M ore people suffer frombad debts than from stealing and destruction o f

property . It is easier to contract a debt, o r to borrowa trifle

,than to steal it outright ; it is safer, too.

Imprudence is o n e of the chief characteristics of thisgenus o f iniquity .

“I would sooner owe you this thancheat you out o f it ' this , in word or deed, is thehighly spiritual consolation they offer those whom theyfleece and then laugh at.The wilful debtor is

,first o f all , a thief and a

robber,because he retains unjustly the lawful

possessions o f another; There is n o difference betweentaking and keeping what belongs to the neighbor . Theloss is the same to a man whether he is robbed of acertain amount o r sells goods for which he getsnothing in return . The injustice is the same in bothcases , the malice identical . He therefore who can payhis debts , and will not, must be branded as a thief andan enemy to the rights o f property.

The debtor is guilty o f a second crime , ofdishonesty and fraud against his fellow-man , by reasono f his breaking a contract

,entered upon with a party

in good faith,and binding in conscience until cancelled

by fulfilment. When a man borrows or buys or runs

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

3 10 M ORAL BRIEFS.

forever ; ships coming in , whose fate is yet unlearned ;windfalls from rich relatives that are n ot yet born

,etc.

and from delay to delay they become not only lessable , but less willing, to settle their accounts .Sometimes you meet a fellow anxious to square himselffor the total amount ; half his assets is negotiable, theother half is gall . He threatens you with thealternative of half or none ; he wants you to accepthis impudence at the same figures at which he himselfvalues it. And this schemer usually succeeds in hisendeavor.

Others there are who protest their determinationto pay up

,even to the last cent ; their dun-bills are

always kept in sight,lest they forget their obligations ;

they treasure these bills , as on e treasures a thing ofimmense value . But they live beyond their means andincome , purchase pleasure and luxury, refuse to curtailfrivolous expenses and extravagant outlay. And in themeantime their debts remain in statu quo, unredeemedand less and less redeemable, their determination holdsgood

,apparently ; and the creditor breaks command

ments looking on and hOping.

Some do violence to their thinking faculty bytrying to find justification

,somehow , for not paying

their debts . The creditor is dead, they say ; o r he hasplenty and can well afford to be generous . An attemptis often made at establishing a case o f occult compensation , its only merit being its ingenuity , worthy o f abetter cause. All such lame excuses argue a deeperperversity of will , a

‘

malice well-nigh incurable ; butthey do n ot satisfy justice , because they are notfounded on truth.

A debt has a character of sacredness,like all moral

obligations ; more sacred than many other moralobligations

,because this quality is taken directly from

the eternal prototype o f justice , which is God . Youcannot wilfully repudiate it therefo re without repudiating God . You must respect it as you respect Him .

Your sins and your debts will follow you before the

DEBTS. 3 I I

throne of God. God alone is concerned with your sins ;but with your debts a third party is concerned. Andif God may easily waive His claims against you as asinner, a sterner necessity may influence His judgment of you. as a debtor, through respect fo r theinviolable rights of that third party who does n ot

forgive so readily.

TH E END .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

CATHOLIC WORSHIP . R ev . R . Bren n an , L L .D .

aper 0 . I 5 1 00 cop ies ,Cloth , 1 00 Cop ies ,CHARACTERISTICS OF TRUE DEVOTION . Grou , S.J.

CHARITY THE O RIGIN OF EVERY BLESSING.

CHILD OF MAR Y. Prayer-Book.

CHILD’S PRAYER-BOOK OF THE SACRED HEART.CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE , SPIR A GO ’

S METHOD OF. Edited by BishopMessmer . n et, I 5 0

CHRISTIAN FATHER . Cramer . Paper , 2 5 copies , 3 7 5Cloth , 2 5 cop ies , 6 00

CHRISTIAN MOTHER . Cramer . Paper , 2 5 cop ies , 3 7 5Cloth , 2 5 cop ies , 6 00

CHURCH AND HER ENEMIES . R ev . M . Muller , C.SS .R . n et, I 1 0

COMEDY OF ENGLISH PROTESTANTISM . A . F . Mar shall . n et,0 7 5

COMMUNION . Paper , per 1 00 n et, 3 5 0

COMPLETE OFFICE OF HOLY WEEK. 0 5 0

CONFESS ION . Paper , per 1 00 , n et, 3 5 0

CONFIRMATION . Paper , per 1 00, n et, 3 5 0

DEVOTION OF THE HOLY ROSARY a n d the Five Scapular s. n et,0 7 5

DEVOTIONS AND PR A YE R s FOR THE SICK-ROOM . Kr ebs,C.SS .R .

n et,I 00

DEVOTIONS FOR FIRST FRIDAY. Huguet . 0 40

D IGNITY AND DUTIES OF THE PRIEST ; o r Selv a , a Co llection ofMa ten al for Ecclesiastical Retreats. By St. Alphon sus de

n et,I 2 5

D IGNITY,AUTHORITY

,DUTIES OF PARENTS , ECCLES IASTICAL AND

CIVIL POWERS . By R ev . M . Muller , C . .SS R . n ot I 40D IVINE GRACE . A Ser ies O f In struction s ar ran ged accordin g to

the Baltimore Catechism. Edited by R ev . Edmun d J . Wir th ,

Ph .D . , D .D . n et, I 5 0DIVINE OFFICE ' Exp lan ation s of the Psalms an d Can ticles. By St.

Alphon sus de Liguor i . n et, I 2 5

EPISTLES AND GOSPELS . Large Pr in t. 0 2 5

EUCHARIST AND PENANCE . R ev . M . Muller , C .SS .R . n et, I 1 0

EUCHARISTIC CHRIST. Reflection s an d Con sideration s o n theBlessed Sacramen t. R ev . A . Tesmere . n et

, I 00

EUCHARISTIC GEMS . A Thought about the Most Blessed Sacramen t. fo r Every Day 1n the Year . Co elea er . 0 7 5

EXPLANATION OF COMMANDMENTS,ILLUSTRATED . I 00

EXPLANATION OF THE APOSTLES’ CREED , ILLUSTRATED . I 00

EXPLANATION OF THE BALTIMORE CATECHISM OF CHRISTIAN D o cTRINE . R ev . Th. L . Kmkead . n et, I 00

EXPLANATION OF THE COMMANDMENTS,Pr ecepts of the Chur ch.

v . .M Muller,

n et, I 1 0

EXPLANATION OF THE GOSPELS a n d of Catholic Worship . R ev . L .

A . Lamber t. Paper , 2 5 cop 1es, 4 5 0

Cloth , 2 5 cop1es, 9 00

EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRAMENTS,ILLUSTRATED . I 00

EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS . R ev . M . v.Co chem . I 2 5

EXPLANATION OF THE OUR FATHER AND THE HAIL MARY . R ev .

R . Bren n an , L L .D . 0 7 5

E XPLANATION OF THE PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES OF THE MASS ,ILLUSTRATED. R ev . D . I . L an slo ts , O .S.B .

‘ I 2 5

EXPLANATION OF THE SALVE REGINA . Liguor i. 0 7 5

EXTREME UNCTION. Paper , I 00 copies , 6 00

FIRST AND GREATEST COMMANDMENT. Muller , C .SS .R . n et,I 40

FIRST COMMUNICANT’S MANUAL. 0 5 0

FLOWERS OF THE PASSION. Thoughts of St. Paul of the Cross. ByR ev. Loui s Th. de Jésus-Agomsan t. 0 5 0

FOLLOWING O FO

CHR IST. Thomas aKempis.

With Reflection s , 0 5 0Without Reflection s, o 4 5Edition de luxe , I 2 5

FOUR LAST THINGS , THE. Death , Judgmen t , Heaven ,Hell . Med

itation s. Father M . V. Co chem. Cloth ,0 7 5

GARLAND OF PRAYER. With Nuptial Mass. Leather . 0 90

GENERAL CONFESSION MADE EASY. R ev . A . Ko n in gs , C.SS .R .

Flexible ,1 00 Copies , I O 00

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE . Verheyen . n et,0 3 0

GLORIES OF DIVINE GRACE . D r . M . J . Scheeben . n et, 5 0I

GLORIES OF MARY . St. Alphon sus de Liguori . 2 vols. n et,2 5 0

Popular cd.,I vol . , I 2 5

GOD THE TEACHER OF MANKIND . Muller . 9 vols. Per set, 9 5 0

GO F F INE’

s DEVOUT INSTRUCTIONS . 1 40 Illustr ation s. Cloth I o o

2 5 cop ies, I 7 5 0

GO L D EN _SA ND S. Little Coun sels fo r the San ctification an d Hap

p in ess of Daily Life.

Third Ser ies, 0 5 0Fourth Ser ies, 0 5 0Fifth Ser ies, 0 5 0

GRACE AND THE SACRAMENTS . Muller , C.SS.R . n et, I 2 5

GREAT MEANS.

OF SALVATION AND OF PERFECTION. St. Alphon susde Liguor i . n et, I 2 5

GREAT SUPPER OF GOD , THE . By R ev. S . Coube, SJ . Edited by

R ev . F . X. Brady, S.J. Cloth , n et, I 00

GREETINGS To THE CHRIST-CHILD , a Collection of Poems fo r theYoun g. Illustrated. 0 60

GUIDE To CONFESSION AND COMMUNION . 0 60

HANDBOOK OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION . Wilmers , SJ . n et, I 5 0

HARMONY OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. Heuser . n et, I 2 5

HELP F OR THE POOR SOULS IN PURGATORY . Prayer s an d Devotion sin aid of the Sufferin g Souls. 0 so

HELPS To.

A SPIRITUAL LIFE . From the German of R ev . JosephSchn eider , S.J. With Addition s by R ev . Ferr eol Gi ra rdey ,

C .SS .R . n et,I 2 5

HIDDEN TREASURE ' The Value an d Excellen ce of the Holy Mass.

By St. Leona rd of Port Maur ice. 0 5 0

3

HISTORY OF THE MASS . B y R ev. J . O'

B rien . n et,I 2 5

HOLY EUCHARIST. By St. Alphon sus de Liguori . The Sa cr ifice ,

the Sacramen t , a n d the Sacred Hear t of Jesus Chr ist. Noven ato the Holy Ghost. n et

, I 2 5

HOLY MASS . By R ev . M . Muller , C.SS .R . n et,I 2 5

HOLY MASS . By St. Alphon sus de Liguor i. n et, I 2 5

HOW To COMFORT THE SICK. Krebs, C.SS .R . n et, I 00

HOW To MAKE THE M ISSION. By a Domin ican Father . Paper , 0 10

per 1 00, 5 00

ILLUSTRATED PRAYER-BOOK FOR CHILDREN. o 2 5

IMITATION OF CHRIST. See“Followin g of Christ.

IMITATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. Tran slated by Mr s. A .

R . Ben n ett-Gladston e.

Plain Edition , 0 5 0

Edi tion de luxe , I 5 0IMITATION OF THE SACRED HEART. By R ev . F . A r n ou dt , S.J. E n

tirely n ew , r eset edition , I 2 5

INCARNATION , BIRTH , AND INFANCY OF JESUS CHRIST , o r , TheMyster ies of Faith . By St. Alphon sus de Liguor i . n et, I 2 5

INDULGENCES , A PRACTICAL GUIDE To . B ern ad , O .M .I . 0 7 5

IN HEAVEN WE KNOW OUR OWN. By PSre Blot , SJ . 0 60

INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE CATHOLIC FATHER. Rightev . D r . A . Egger . 0 60

INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE CATHOLIC MOTHER . Rightcv . D r . A . Egger . 0 60

INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH . 0 60

INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS . Schmitt. n et, 0 5 0

INSTRUCTIONS ON THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD an d the Sacramen tsOf the Chur ch. By St. Alphon sus de Liguor i .Paper , 2 5 cop ies ,Cloth , 0 .40 , 2 5 cop ies ,INTERIOR OF JESUS AND MARY. Gr ou. 2 vols.

INTRODUCTION TO A DEVOUT LIFE. By St. Fr an cis de Sales.

Cloth , 0 5 0

LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS DE LIGUORI. 4 vols .,each vol n et

,I 2 5

LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI an d Gen er al Alphabetical In deXto St. Alphon sus’Works. n et, I 2 5

LITTLE ALTAR BOYS' MANUAL. 0 2 5

LITTLE BOOK OF SUPERIORS . Go lden San ds. n et, 0 60

LITTLE CHILD OF MARY. A Small Pr ayer-Book. 0 3 5

LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY. L asa n ce. 0 2 5

LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. JOSEPH . Lin gs. 0 2 5

LITTLE MONTH OF MAY. By Ella. McMahon . Flexible , o 2 5

LITTLE MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY. 2 5

LITTLE OFFI CE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. per I 00 ,

2 5 0

LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS . New , cheap edition , I c cLIVES OF THE SAINTS . With Reflection s fo r Every Day of theYear . L arge siz e , I so

0

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

MY LITTLE PRAYER-B OOK. ILLUSTRATED. 0 1 2

NEW MA Y DEVOTIONS. Wir th. n et, I 00

NEW MONTH OF THE HOLY ANGELS .NEW MONTH OF THE SACRED HEART.NEW SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMPANION.NEW TESTAMENT. Cheap Edition .

3 2mo , fleXIble cloth ,

3 2mo , lambskin , limp , r oun d cor n er s, gilt edges ,NEW TESTAMENT Illustr ated Edi tion .

1 6mo , Pr in ted in two color s , W ith 1 00 full-page ill ,

I 6mo , Rutlan d Roan , limp , solid gold edges ,NEW TESTAMENT. In dia Pap er Edition .

American Seal , limp , r oun d corn er s , gilt edges 00

Persian Calf , limp , r oun d corn er s , gilt edge n et, I 2 5Mor occo , limp , r oun d cor n ers , gold edges ,

g

gold r oll in side , n et I 5 0NEW TESTAMENT. Large Pr in t Edition .

I zmo , large n et, 0 7 5I zmo , Fr en ch Levan t , limp , gold edges , n et, I 2 5

NEW TESTAMENT STUD IES. Con aty, D.D 1 2mo. o 60OFFICE , COMPLETE , OF HOLY WEEK. 0 5 0

ON THE ROAD TO ROME . By W. Richards. n et, 0 5 0

OUR FAVORITE DEVOTIONS . By Very R ev . Dean A . A . Lin gs. 0 7 5

OUR FAVORITE NOVENAS . By Very R ev . Dean A . A . Lin gs. 0 7 5

OUR LADY OF GOOD COUNSEL iN GENAZZANO. Dillon , D .D . o 7 5

OUR MONTHLY DEVOTIONS. By Very R ev . Dean A . A . Lin gs. I 2 5

OUR OWN WILL AND How To DETECT IT IN OUR ACTIONS . R ev .

John Allen , D .D . n et, 0 7 5

PARACLETE,THE . Devotion s to the Holy Ghost. 0 60

PARADISE ON EARTH OPEN To ALL ; A Religi ous Vocation the Sur estWay in Life. By R ev. An ton io Natale , S.J. n et, 0 40

PARISH PRIEST ON DUTY , THE. A Practical Man ual fo r Pastors,Cur ates , an d Theological Studen ts Pr epar in g for the Mission .

(The Sacramen ts. ) By R ev ..Herman J. Heuser , Pr ofessor

of Theology a t Overbrook Semin ary. n et, 0 60

PASSION AND DEATH OF JESUS CHRIST. By St. Alphon sus deLiguori. n et, I 2 5

PASSION FLOWERS. Poems by Father Edmun d , of the Heart ofMary, C.P. I 2 5

PEARLS FROM F A E E R . B r un owe. 0 5 0

PEARLS OF PRAYER . 0 3 5

PEOPLE’S M ISSION BOOK , THE . Paper , p er 1 00 , 6 00

PEPPER AND SALT,SPIRITUAL . Stan g . Paper , 2 5 cop ies , 4 5 0

Cloth , 2 5 cop ies , 9 00

PERFECT RELIGIOUS,THE . D e la Motte . Cloth , n et, I o o

PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS . New edition , with Reflection sfo r Every Day in the Year . 8y o , 2 5 0

PIOUS PREPARATION FOR FIRST HOLY COMMUNION . R ev . F , X .

L asan ce . Cloth , o 7 5POCKET MANUAL . A Vest-pocket Prayer-book, very large typ e . 0 2 5

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON MARRIAGE . Girardey , C .SS .R .

Paper , 2 5 cop ies ,Cloth , 0 .40 ; 2 5 copies.

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON PRAYER . Gira rdey , C .SS .R .

Paper , 2 5 cop ies , 3 7 5Cloth , 0 2 5 copies, 6

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS TO PARENTS o n the Brin ging Up of Children .

By Very R ev . F . Gir a rdey , C .SS .R . Paper , 0 . 2 5 ; 2 5 cop ies , 3 7 5Cloth , 0 .40 ; 2 5 cop ies, 6 0

PRAYER-BOOK FOR RELIGIOUS . A Comp lete Man ual of Prayersa n d Devotion s fo r the Use of the Member s of all ReligiousCommun ities. By R ev. F . X. L asan ce. n et, I 5 0

PREACHING . Vol XV. St . Alphon sus de Liguor i . The ExercisesO f the Mission s . Var ious Coun sels In struction s on theComman dmen ts an d Sacramen ts . n et

,I 2 5

PREPARATION FOR DEATH . St . Alphon sus de Liguor i Con sideration s on the Etern al Truths. Maxims of Etern ity . Rule ofLife . n et, 1 2 5

PRODIGAL SO N ; o r , The Sin n er ’s Return to God . n et, I 00

REASONABLENESS OF CATHOLIC CEREMONIES AND PRACTICES . R ev .

. .Burke 0 3 5

RELIGIOUS STATE , THE . With a Treatise o n the Vocation to thePr iesthood . By St . Alphon sus de Liguori . 0 5 0

R EVELATIONS OF THE SACRED HEART to Blessed Margar et Mary.

B ougaud . Cloth , n et, 1 5 0

R OSARY , THE , THE CROWN OF MARY . By a Domin ican Father . 0 1 0

p er 1 00 , 5 00

ROSARY,THE MOST HOLY . Meditation s . Cr amer . 0 5 0

SACRAMENTALS OF THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH . R ev. A . A .

Lambin g ,D D . Paper , 2 5 cop ies , 4 5 0

Cloth , 0 .60 ; 2 5 cop ies , 9 00

SA CR AM E NTA L s— Pr ayer , etc . R ev . M . Muller , C .SS .R . n et, I 00

SACRED HEART BOOK , THE . By R ev. F . X. L asan ce. 0 7 5

SACRED HEART , LITTLE PRAYER-BOOK OF THE . 0 40

SACRED HEART , THE . R ev . D r . Joseph Keller . 0 7 5

SACRIFICE OF THE MASS WORTHILY CELEBRATED , THE . R ev .

Father Cha ign o n , S .J . n et, I 5 0SECRET OF SANCTITY . St . Fr an cis de Sales. n et, I 00

SERAPHIC GUIDE , THE A Man ual fo r the Members of the ThirdOrder of St. Fran cis. By a Fran ciscan Father . 0 60

SHORT CONFERENCES ON THE LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IMMACULATECONCEPTION . Very R ev . J . Rain er . 0 5 0

SHORT STORIES ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE . From the Fr en ch byMar y McMahon . n et, 0 7 5

SHORT VISITS To THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. L asan ce . 0 2 5

SICK CALLS , o r , Cha ter s o n Pastor al Medicin e. B y the R ev .

red Man n in g ulligan , Birmin gham , En glan d. net, I 00

SODALISTS’ VADE M ECUM . o 5 0SONGS AND SONNETS . Maur ice Fr an cis Egan . I 00

SOUVENIR OF THE NOVITIATE . R ev . Edward I . Taylor . n et, 0 60

SPIRITUAL CRUMB S FOR HUNGRY LITTLE SOULS . Richardson . 0 5 0

SPIRITUAL DESPONDENCY AND TEMPTATIONS. By R ev . P. J . Michel ,From the Fren ch by R ev . F . . Garesché , S.J. n et, I 2 5

SPIRITUAL EXER CISESiFOR A TEN DAYS’ RETREAT. Very R ev . R . v .

metan a C .SS. n et, I 00

SPIRITUAL PEPPER AND SALT . Stan g . Paper , 2 5 copies, 4 5 0Cloth , 0 .60 ; 2 5 cop ies, 9 00

ST . ANTHONY , LITTLE MANUAL OF . 0 60

ST . ANTHONY . R ev . D r . Jo s. Keller . 0 7 5

STATIONS OF THE CROSS . Illustr ated . o 5 0STORIES FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS . R ev . J . A . Keller , D .D . 0 5 0

STRIVING AFTER PERFECTION . R ev . Joseph B ayma , S.J. n et, I 00

SURE WAY To A HAPPY MARRIAGE . R ev . Edward I . Taylor .

Paper , 2 5 copies , 3 7 5Cloth , O .40 ; 2 5 cop ies , 6 0 0

THOUGHTS AND COUNSELS fo r the Con sideration of Catholic Youn gMen . R ev . P . A . Do ss , S.J. n et, I 2 5

THOUGHTS FOR ALL TIMES . Mgr . Vaughan . 0 go

TRAVELLER’S DAILY COMPANION . per 1 00 3 5 0

TRUE POLITENESS . Abbé Fran cis Demore . n et, 0 60

TRUE SPOUSE OF JESUS CHRIST . St. Alphon sus de Liguor i . 2 vols.

Cen ten ary Edition ,0

n et, 2 5 0

The same , o n e-vol . edition , n et

, I 00

TWO SPIRITUAL RETREATS FOR SISTERS . R ev . E . Zolln er . n et, I 00

VENERATION OF THE BLESSED .VIRGIN . Her Feasts , Prayers , R eligi ou s Order s , an d Sodahti es . R ev . B . Rohn er , O .S .B . I 2 5

VEST-POCKET GEMS OF DEVOTION. 0 20

VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS ; o r , The Lives of the Most CelebratedMartyrs of the Chur ch . Vol . IX Alphon sus deLiguor i . n et, I 2 5

VISITS,SHORT , To THE BLESSED SACRAMENT . L asan ce . o 2 5

VISITS To JESUS IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. By the Author of‘Avis Spir ituels.

’0 5 0

VISITS To JESUS IN THE TABERNACLE . Hour s an d Half-Hour s ofAdoration before the B lessed Sacramen t . With a Noven a tothe Holy Ghost an d Devotion s fo r Mass, Holy Communi on , etc .

R ev. F . X L asan ce . Cloth , I 2 5

VISITS To THE M OST HOLY SACRAMENT an d to the B lessed VirginMary. St . Alphon sus de Liguor i . 0 5 0

VOCATIONS EXPLAINED 'Matr imon y , Virginity, The Religious State ,

an d the Pri esthood . By a Vin cen tian Father . 0 I 0

1 00 copies , 6 00

WAY OF INTERIO R PEACE . R ev . Father D e Lehen , S. .J n et, I 2 5

WAY OF SALVATION AND PERFECTION . Medi tation s , Pious R eflection s , Spir itual Tr eatises . St . Alphon sus de Liguor i . n et, I 2 5

WAY OF THE CROSS . Paper , 1 00 copies , 2 5 0

WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES . A n An swer to Ear n est In quirers .

By R ev . Edwin Drury , Mission ar y Pr iest.

Paper , 0 .30 ; 2 5 cop ies ,Cloth , 0 .60 , 2 5 cop ies ,

JUVENILES.

ADVENTURES OF A CASKET .ADVENTURES OF A FRENCH CAPTAIN .

AN ADVENTURE W ITH THE APACHES . Gabriel Ferry.

8

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

GR EAT CAPTAIN , THE . By Katharin e T. Hinkso n .

GREAT-GRANDMOTHER’S SECRET.HALDEMAN CHILDREN , THE. By Mar y E . Man n ix .

HARRY DEE ; o r , Workin g It O u t. By Father Fin n .

HARRY RUSSELL . A Rocklan d College Boy. By R ev.

Copus ,S.J. 'Cuthber t'.

HEIR OF DREAMS , AN. Sallie Margaret O ’

Malley .

HER FATHER’S RIGHT HAND.HIS FIRST AND LAST APPEARANCE. By Father Fin n .

HOP BLOSSOMS . Can on Schmid.

HOSTAGE OF WAR , A . Mary G. Bon esteel.HOW THEY WORKED THEIR WAY. Maur ice F . Egan .

INUNDATION , THE. Can on Schmid.

JACK HILDRETH AM ONG THE INDIANS. 2 vols. Each ,

JACK HILDRETH ON THE NILE . Mar ion Ames Taggart. Cloth ,JACK O ’

L ANTE RN. Mary T. Waggaman .

JUVENILE ROUND TABLE .KLONDIKE PICNIC. Elean or C. Don n elly.LAMP OF THE SANCTUARY. Cardinal Wiseman .

L EGFiND S OF THE HOLY CHILD JESUS from Man y Lan ds. A .

u tz .

LITTLE M ISSY . Mary T. Waggaman .

LOYAL BLUE AND ROYAL SCARLET. Marion A . Taggart.MADCAP SET AT ST. ANNE’S . Mar ion J. B run owe.

MARCELLE . A True Story.MARY TRACY’S FORTUNE . An n a T. Sadlier .MASTER FRIDOLIN . Emmy Giehrl.M ILLY A VE L ING. Sar a Tr ain er Smith. Cloth ,MYSTERIOUS DOORWAY. An n a T. Sadlier .

NAN NOB ODY. Mary T. Waggaman .

OLD CHA R LM ONT’S SE ED-BED . Sar a Tr ain er Smi th.OLD ROBBER’S CASTLE. Can on Schmid .

OLIVE AND THE LITTLE CAKES.O UR BOYS’ AND GIRLS’ LIBRARY. 1 4 vols. Each ,O UR YOUNG FOLKS’ LIBRARY. 1 0 vols. Each ,OVERSEER OF MAHL B OURG. Can on Schmi d.

PANCHO AND PANCHITA. Mar y E . Man n iX.

PAULINE ARCHER. An n a. T. Sadlier .

PICKLE AND PEPPER. Ella Lorain e Dorsey.

PL AYWATER PLOT , THE. By Mary T. Waggaman .

PRIEST OF AUVE IGNY.

'UEEN’S PAGE. Katharin e Tyn an Hinkson .

RECRUIT TOMMY COLLINS . Mary G. Bon esteel.RICHARD ; o r , Devotion to the Stuar ts.

ROSE BUSH . Can on Schmid.

0

0

0

0

O

O

N

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

H

O

O

O

‘

4 5

4S

8 5

8 5

4s

4s

2 5

4s

7 5

40

8 5

8 5

4s

00

8 5

2 5

R OUND TA BL E , JUVENILE . Illustrated. I 00

SAINT CUTHBERT’S . By R ev . J. E . Copus, SJ . 0 8 5

SEA-GULL’S ROCK. J. San deau .

SHERIFF OF THE BEECH FORK , THE . Spalding , S.J.

SUMMER AT WOODVILLE . An n a T. Sadlier .

STRONG-ARM OF AVALON . By Mary T. Waggaman .

TALES AND LEGENDS OF THE M IDDLE AGES . F . D e Capella.TALES AND LEGENDS SERIES. 3 vols. Each ,TALISMAN , THE . By An n a T. Sadlier .,

TAMING OF POLLY. Ella Lo rain e Dor sey.THREE GIRLS A ND ESPECIALLY ONE Mar ion A . Taggar t.THREE LITTLE KINGS. Emmy Giehrl.TOM ’S LUCKPOT. Mary T. Waggaman .

TREASURE OF NUGGET MOUNTAIN. M . A . Taggart.

Two LITTLE GIRLS. By Lilian Mack.

VILLAGE STEEPLE , THE.WAGER OF GERALD O’ROURKE , THE. Fin n -Thiele.

WINNETOU , THE APACHE KN IGHT. Mar ion Ames Taggart.

WRONGFULLY ACCUSED . William Herchen bach .

YOUNG COLOR GUARD , THE . By Mary G. Bon esteel.

NOVELS AND STORIES.BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE. R ev. F . J. Fin n , SJ. 1 00

CIRCUS RIDER’S DAUGHTER , THE. A Novel. F . v. Brackel. I 2 5

CONNOR D’ARCY‘ S STRUGGLES . A Novel. Ber tholds. 1 2 5

CORINNE’S Vow. Mary T. Waggaman . 1 2 5

DION AND THE SIBYLS . A Classic Novel. Miles Keo n . Cloth , I 2 5

FAB IOLA ; o r , The Chur ch of the Catacombs. B y Cardin alWiseman .

Pop ular Illustrated Edition ,0 90

FABIOLA’S SISTERS . A Compan ion Volume to Cardin al Wiseman ’

s“Fabiola.” A . C. Clarke. I 2 5

FATAL BEACON,THE. A Novel. B y F . v. Brackel. I 2 5

HEARTS OF GOLD. A Novel . By I. E dho r . I 2 5

HEIRESS OF CR ONENSTE IN , THE. Coun tess Hahn -Hahn . I 2 5

HER FATHER'S DAUGHTER. Kathar in e Tyn an Hin kso n . n et, I 2 5

IDOLS; o r . The Secret of the R ue Chaussée d’A n tin . D e Naver y .

I 2 5

IN THE DAYS OF KING HAL. Mar ion Ames Taggar t. n et, I 2 5“KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS. A Novel. By J. Harr ison . 1 2 5

LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER. A Novel. Josephin e Marié. I 00

LINKED LIVES. A Novel. Lady Ger tr ude Douglas. 1 5 0

MARCELLA GRACE. A Novel. Rosa Mulhollan d. Illu strateddition . I 2 5

M ISS ERIN. A Novel. M . E . Fran cis.

MONK’S PARDON , THE. Raoulde Navety .

MR . BILLY BUTTONS. A Novel. Walter Lecky .

OUTLAW OF CAMA RGUE , THE. A Novel. A . de Lamothe.

I I

PA SSING SHADOWS . A Novel . An thon y Yorke .

PER E M ONNI E R’

S WARD. A Novel . Walter Lecky.

PILKINGTON HEIR , THE . A Novel . By An n a T. Sadlier .

PRODIGAL’S DAUGHTER , THE . Lelia Hardin Bugg .

ROMANCE OF A PLAYWRIGHT. Vtc . Hen r i de B o r n ier . I 00

ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE AMERI CAN CATHOLICNOVELISTS . I 5 0

ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE FRENCH CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. 1 5 0

ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE GERMAN CATHOLICNOVELISTS . Illu str at I 5 0

ROUND TABLE OF THE R E P E SE NTA TIVE IRISH AND ENGLISH CATHOLI C NOVELISTS . I 5 0

TRUE STORY OF MASTER GERARD , THE. By An n a T . Sadlier . I 2 5

UNRAVELING OF A TANGLE , THE . By Mar io n A . Taggar t. 1 2 5

VOCATION OF EDWARD CONWAY. A Novel . Maur ice F . Egan . I 2 5

WOMAN OF FORTUNE,A . Chr istian Reid . 1 2 5

WORLD WELL LOST. Esther Rober tson . 0 7 5

LIVES A ND HISTOR IES .

AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ST. IGNATIUS LOYOLA . Edited by R ev . J . F . X.

O’

Co n o r . Cloth . n et,I 2 5

BIBLE STORIES FOR LITTLE CHILDREN. Pap er ,Cloth ,

0 2 0

CHURCH HISTORY. B u sin ger . 0 7 5

H ISTO R IO GRA PHIA ECCLES IASTICA quam Histo r iae ser iam Solidamqu eOper amNavan tibu s A ccommodavitGuil. Stan g ,

D .D . n et, I 00

H ISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Brueck. 2 vols. n et, 3 00

HISTORY OF THE CATHOLI C CHURCH. Shea. 1 5 0

H ISTORY OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION IN ENGLAND ANDIRELAND . Wm . Cobbett. Cloth , n et, 0 7 5

LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI . R ev . Eugen e Gr imm , C .SS .R .

Cen ten ary Edi tion . 5 vols. , each , n et, 1 2 5

LIFE AND LIFE-WORK OF MOTHER THEODORE GUERIN , Foun dressof the Sister s of Pr oviden ce at St.

-Mary ~of-the-Woods , VigoCoun ty , In dian a. n et, 2 00

LIFE OF CHRIST. Illustrated. Father M . v. Co chem. I 2 5

LIFE OF FR. FRANCIS PO ILVA CHE,C.SS .R . Paper , n et, 0 20

LIFE OF MOST REV. JOHN HUGHES . Bran n . n et, 0 7 5

LIFE OF MOTHER FONTBONNE , Foun dr ess of the Sister s of St. Josephof Lyon s. Abbé Rivaux. Cloth ,

n et, I 2 5

LIFE OF SISTER ANNE KATHERINE EMMERICH , of the Or der o f St.Augustin e. R ev . Thomas Wegen er , O .S.A . n et, I 5 0

LIFE OF ST. ANTHONY. Ward. Illustrated. 0 7 5

LIFE OF ST. CATHARINE OF SIENNA. Edward L . Ayme, M .D . I 00LIFE OF ST. CLARE OF MONTEFALCO . Locke , O .S.A . n et, 0 7 5

LIFE OF MLLE . LE GRAS . n et, I 2 5

LIFE OF ST . CHANTAL . B ouga ud. 2 vols. n et, 4 00

LIFE OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN . Illustr ated. Rohn er , O .S.B. I 2 5

1 2

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

GOD KNOWABLE AND KNOWN. R ev. Maur ice Ron ayn e , S.J.n et, I 2 5GOOD CHRISTIAN , THE . R ev . J . Allen , D .D . 2 vols n et, 5 00

HISTORY OF THE MASS . R ev. John O ’

B rien . n et. I 2 5

HUNO LT’

S SERMONS . 1 2 vols., net, 2 5 00

HUNO LT’

S SHORT SERMONS . 5 vols. , net, 1 0 00

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY O F THE SCRIPTURES . Gigot. n et, 2 5 0

INTRODUCTION To THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. Vol. 1.

n et, I so

JESUS LIVING IN THE PRIEST. Millet-Byr n e . n et, 2 00

LAST THINGS , SERMONS ON THE FOUR. Hun olt. 2 vols. net. 5 00

L ENTEN SERM ONS . Edited by R ev . A ug.Wirth , O .S.B . n et, 2 00

L IE E R STATUS A NIM A RUM . Pocket E dition , n et, halfleather , n et, 2 00

MORAL PRINCIPLES AND MEDI CAL PRACTICE,THE BASIS OF MEDICAL

JURISPRUDENCE . R ev . Char les Coppen s SJ . n et, I 5 0

NATURAL LAW AND LEGAL PRACTICE. Holamd ,S J. n et, I 7 5

NEW AND OLD SERMONS . Wir th , O .S.B . 8 vols n et, 1 6 00

OUTLINES OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. Hun ter , S'. 3 vols n et, 4 5 0

O UTLINES OF JEWISH HISTORY. By Gigot , S.S. net, I 5 0

O UTLINES OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. Gigot. Cloth , n et, I 5 0

PASTORAL THEOLOGY. R ev . Wm. Stan g ,D .D . n et, I 5 0

PENANCE , SERMONS O N . Hun olt, 2 vols. n et, 5 00

PEW-RENT RECEIPT BOOK. n et, I 00

PHILOSOPHIA DE MORALI . Russo . n et, 2 00

POLITICAL AND MORAL ESSAYS . R ickaby , SJ . n et, I 5 0

PRAXIS SYNO D A L IS. Man uale Syn odi D iocesan ae ac Provin cialisCeleb ran dae. n et, 0 60

R EGISTRUM B A PTISM O RUM . n et, 3 5 0

R E GISTRUM MATR IM ON IO RUM . n et, 3 5 0

RELATION OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY To PHILOSOPHY. Mgr .

Mer cier . M . 0 3 5

RITUALE COMPEND IO SUM seu 0rdo Administr an di quaedam Sacr a'men ta et alia Oflicxa E cclesIastxca Rite Peragen dx ex R i tuahRoman o , n ovissime editio desumptas. net, 0 90

ROSARY,SERMONS ON THE MOST HOLY. Fr in gs. net, I 00

SACRED HEART , SIx SERMONS ON DEVOTION TO THE. By R ev.

D r . E . B ierbaum. n et, 0 60

SANCTUARY BOYS’ ILLUSTRATED MANUAL . R ev. J. A . McCallen ,

S.S. n et, 0 5 0

SERMON MANUSCRIPT BOOK.SERMONS

, HUNO L T’S. I 2 vols n et, 2 5 00

SERMONS, A E R ID GE D ,

FOR SUNDAYS . Liguor i. n et, I 2 5

SERMONS FOR CHILDREN OF MARY. Caller io . n et, I 5 0SERMONS FOR CHILDREN'S MASSES. F rassin etti-Lin gs. n et, I so

SERMONS FOR THE SUNDAYS AND CHIEF FESTIVAL S OF THE E CCL E SIA STICA L YEAR. R ev . J. Po ttgeisser , SJ . 2 vols. , n et, 2 5 0

SERMONS FROM THE LATINS . Baxter . n et, 2 00

SERMONS,FUNERAL . Wirth. 2 vols. , n et, 2 00

SERMONS,HUNO LT

’

S SHORT. 5 vols, n et, 1 0 00

SERMONS. LENTEN . Wirth .

SE RMONS , NEW AND OLD. Wir th. 8 vols., not, 16 00

SERMONS ON DEVOTION To SACRED HEART. Bierbaum. net, 0 7 5SERMONS ON OUR LOR D , THE BLESSED VIRGIN , AND THE SAINTS.

Hun olt. 2 vols ., n et, 5 00

SERMONS ON PENANCE . Hun olt. 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

SERMONS ON THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Scheurer-L asan ce . net, I‘

5 0

SERMONS ON THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES. Hun olt . Tr an slated by R ev .

John Allen , 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

SERMONS ON THE FOUR LAST THINGS . Hun olt. 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

SERMONS O N THE ROSARY. Fr in gs. n et, I 00

SERMONS ON THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS. B un olt. 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

SERMONS ON THE STATES OF LIFE . Hun olt. 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

SHORT SERM ONS. By R ev. F . Hun olt , SJ . 5 vols. , I 0 00

SHORT SERMONS FOR LOW MASSES. Schouppe , SJ . n et, I 2 5

SOCIALISM EXPOSED AND REFUTED. Cathrein . net, I 00

SPECIAL INTRODUCTION To THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.Part I . Gigot. n et, I 5 0

SYNOPSIS THE O L OGIA E D O GMA TICA E AD MENTEM S . THOMAE A'UINATIS . Tan querey , S.S. 3 vols n et, 5 2 5

SYNOPSIS THE O L O GIA MORALIS ET PASTO R A L IS. Tan quereywe vols.

,

t 3 SO

THE O L OGIA DOGMATICA SPECIALIS. Tan querey . 2 vols n et, 3 5 0

THE O L O GIA FUNDAMENTALIS . Tan qu erey . n et, I 7 5VIRTUES

,SERMONS ON THE CHRI STIAN. Hun olt. 2 vols. , n et, 5 00

M ISCELLANEOUS.A GENTLEMAN. M . F . Egan , L L .D . 0 75

A LADY. Man n ers an d So cia l Usages. Lelia Hardin Bugg. 0 7 5

B ENZIGE R’

S MAGAZINE. Per year , 2 00

BONE RULES ; o r , Skeleton of En glish Gr ammar . Tabb , AM . 0 5 0

CANTATA CATHO L ICA . B . H . F . Hellebusch. n et, 0 00

CATHOLIC HOME ANNUAL. Stories by Best Writers. 0 2 5

CORRECT THING FOR CATHOLICS , THE. Lelia Hardin Bugg. 0 7 5

ELOCUTION CLASS . Elean or O ’

Grady . n et, 0 5 0

EYE OF THE REFORMATION , THE. R ev . Wm . Sta n g. P3133

,

o 2 5

GUIDE FOR SACRISTANS an d Others Havin g Charge of the Altar an dSan ctuary. By a Member of an Altar Society. n et, 0 7 5

HINTS ON LETTER-WRITING. “Go lden San ds.

”0 60

How To GET ON. R ev . Bern ard Feen ey. I o o

HYMN-BOOH o r SUND AY-SCHOOL COMPANION. 0 3 5

LITTLE F O LHS’ ANNUAL. O . I O ; per 1 00 , 7 5 0

NEW SUNDAY-SCHOOL CO M PANION. 0 2 5

READ INGS AND RECITATIONS FOR JUNIORS . O'

Gr ady . n et, 0 5 0

SELECT RE CITATIONS FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS AND ACADEMIES.E lean or O '

Grady. I o o

STATISTICS CONCERNING EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES. Hedges.

O 10

3l.rs CORD/A. Hymn s. Cloth , per 100 , I s.o o . Paperper 100, With Bazheh an d German Text. 0 4 5

I S

The Popular C atholic F amilyM o n thly.

2 .

SUBSCR IPTION,A YEAR .

Wbat ‘

Bengz’

ger’

s M agczzznegives

its Readers'

Fifty complete stor ies by the best wr iters— equal to a book o f

300 pages sellin g at

Three complete n ovels O f absorbin g in terest— equal to threebooks selling at each.

Seven hun dred beautiful illustration s.

Forty large reproduction s O f celebrated pain tin gs.Forty storiettes.

Twen ty articles— equa l to a book of 1 5 0 pages, o n travel an dadven ture ; o n the man n ers, customs an d home-li fe ofpeoples; o n the haun ts an d habits of an imal life, etc.

Twen ty articles— equal to a bookof 1 5 0pages— o u o ur coun tryhistor ic even ts, times, places, importan t in dustr ies.

Twen ty a rticles— equal to a book of I 5 0 pages— o u the fin e

arts ; celebrated artists an d their pain tin gs, scu lpture,music, etc. , an d n ature studies.

A rticles by Father Fin n , the most popular wr iter fo r theyoung.

Twelve pages of gamesan d amusemen ts fo r in an d o ut of doors.

Fifty pages of fashion s, fads a n d fan cies, gathered at homean d abroad , helpful hin ts fo r home workers, householdcolumn , cookin g receipts, etc.

Cur ren t Even ts,” the importan t happen in gs over the wholewor ld

,descr ibed with pen an d pictures.

Twelve pr iz e competition s, in which valuable pr iz es a re o ffered.

Premium Coupon s, worth 20 cen ts on every dolla r in purchasing books advertised in the Magaz in e.

THIS IS WHAT IS GIVEN IN A SINGL E YEAR O F

BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

Deacrdmed usmg the Bookkeeper processNeutraliz ing agent MagnesrumOX|deTreatmentDate Dec 2004

PreservationTechnologiesA WO R L D L E A D E R IN PA PER PR ESERVATIO N

111 Thomson ParkOmveCranberry Township, PA 16066

(724) 779-2111