VWa g—
ADS If6?^

;

,A" f pL ., .._ _ _

THE

APPEAL

TO REASON





THE APPEAL TO REASON
by

Most Rev. Duane G. Hunt, D.D., LL.D.

Bishop of Salt Lake

Seven addresses delivered in the Catholic Hour, produced by
the National Council of Catholic Men, and broadcast

through the courtesy of the National Broadcasting

Company and associated stations.

Page

June 12: The Need for Authority 3

June 19: The Divinity of Christ 11

June 26: The Divinity of the Church 20

July 3: The Apostolicity of the Church 29

July 10: The Sacraments 37

July 17: The Real Presence 46

July 24: The Sacrament of Matrimony 56

National Council of Catholic Men

Producer of the Catholic Hour

1312 Massachusetts Avenue,

Washington, D. C.

Printed and distributed by Our Sunday" Visitor

Huntington, Indiana



Imprimatur:

*%• JOHN FRANCIS NOLL, D. D.,

Bishop of Fort Wayne



THE NEED FOR AUTHORITY

Address delivered June 12, 1938.

My subject as announced, “The Appeal to

Reason,” indicates the general point of view of my

present series of addresses. As you judge at once, I

shall bring before you certain doctrines of the Cath-

olic religion; and I shall try to demonstrate that

these doctrines are attractive inasmuch as they ap-

peal to your reason.

In using this approach to religion I do not mean

to imply that it is the only one. Man’s nature is not

one sided; it is made up of soul and body, and the

soul has a free will as well as an intellect. Further-

more, affecting both body and soul are the emotions.

Man himself is complex; his need for religion is

complex. It would be unreasonable, therefore, in-

deed it would be contrary to my own thesis as con-

tained in my subject, to suggest that there is but

one approach to religion. Reason itself tells us that

religion is greater than reason.

If you ask, then, why I limit my discussion to one

approach, the answer is readily given. Limited time

makes anything else impractical. And why do I

choose the appeal to the intellect? Is it more impor-

tant than the appeal to the will or to the emotions?

Perhaps not more important; but it does seem to

come first. The very first question that the inquiring

mind raises about an article of faith is “why should

I believe it”, or “how do I know that it is true.”

This question, as applied to Christian doctrine, can

be, and in my opinion should be, answered frankly.

It seems to be taken for granted nowadays that

the young people of the present generation, more so



4 THE APPEAL TO REASON

than those of previous generations, demand satis-

factory reasons before they will believe in any

Christian doctrine. It is not sufficient for them, so it

is said, that their parents believe
;
they are no longer

willing to follow the example of others. They stand

as individuals
;
and as individuals they challenge the

Church to present convincing evidence of her doc-

trines.

Perhaps this description is more or less correct.

From one point of view, we may hope that it is cor-

rect. For precisely to the degree that our young

people are ready to think about religion, ready to

criticize and analyze it, to that degree there is hope

of convincing them. The Church can ask for no bet-

ter opportunity than that of presenting her doc-

trines to minds that are ready to reason honestly

about them. And since the impression has been

widely formed that the Christian religion is not

reasonable and that it can survive only so long as

it is not analyzed too closely, it is most important, I

believe, to demonstrate that the impression is false,

as false as it is harmful.

This afternoon, in the first of my series of ad-

dresses, *1 discuss the subject of authority. In par-

ticular, I call attention to man’s need of God’s au-

thority, a need which is evident from the facts of

life. And that God must have provided for this need

would seem to follow from the further facts that He

is the author both of religion and of man and that

He made the one to serve the other.

In my discussion this afternoon I shall refer to

“the churches”, and to the authority of “the

churches”. By such general terms I do not mean to

imply that all churches are the same, or that Chris-

tian authority is or can be divided. Neither do I at-



THE NEED FOR AUTHORITY 5

tempt to speak for any of the non-Catholic religious

organizations. I am a Catholic and I speak as a

Catholic. To the best of my ability I am trying to

serve the Catholic Church, as an expression of grati-

tude for the gift of faith which came to me some

years ago.

In doing so, however, I find myself drawn inevit-

ably into the consideration of problems which affect

other churches. The wave of indifference, for in-

stance, which is sweeping through the country today

is affecting all of the churches. It is a common

enemy, a fact which we may as well recognize.

That this indifference is but the logical result of

the loss of respect for authority is evident, I believe,

from what has happened in our society during re-

cent years. Of course, there is nothing new in the

protest against rightful authority
;
that protest is as

old as religion. During recent years, however, the

protest has taken on new forms and a new em-

phasis. And so it may be discussed as something

modern.

During the last century there arose a rather

definite movement in the religious life of our coun-

try, heralded by its sponsors as a move for freedom.

They complained that under the leadership of the

churches Christianity had become top-heavy, too

formal, too highly organized, and too dictatorial;

and that it had robbed the individual man of his

freedom. It was their great mission to correct all

this. And they would do so, they promised, not

merely for the sake of the individual but also for the

sake of Christianity itself.

Their protest was threefold. They complained

that the churches were wrong in formulating creeds

for their people, wrong in laying down standards of



6 THE APPEAL TO REASON

conduct for them, and wrong in dictating forms of

worship. You will recall from your own experiences,

I am sure, having heard these complaints.

Concerning matters of belief, you have been ad-

vised to think for yourself and to break away from

servility to the churches. You have been told that

the beliefs which you discover for yourself, even

though they differ from those of your neighbors, are

the correct ones for you.

Concerning conduct has come a similar criticism,

namely, that you do not need the help of the churches

to know the difference between right and wrong.

You have been urged to work out your own stand-

ards of morality, in the assurance that, though they

may differ from the standards of other times and of

other men, they are right and sufficient for you.

And in respect to the manner of worshipping

God, once again you have been advised to follow

your own tastes and judgments. You have been as-

sured that you need no religious organization to de-

vise forms of worship for you, that your own way of

worshipping God, regardless of how different it may

be, is best for you.

These doctrines, attractive and alluring as they

are, have been urged upon the American people with

especial emphasis for the past few generations. They

have influenced the lives of millions of our people;

so much so that their logical effects may now be

judged. We need not speculate as to what the effects

may be in the future; we know from observation

what they are in the present. To these effects I now

call attention.

Consider first the protest that the churches

should not formulate creeds for their people. Now

that millions of our people have come to this point of



THE NEED FOR AUTHORITY 7

view and have abandoned the creeds of their

churches, has their religious faith been helped or

harmed ? The boasted emancipation, has it made its

beneficiaries believe more or less strongly in relig-

ion? Apply any test you wish; name any religious

truth you care to
;
the answer is the same. There is

the belief in the divinity of Christ, for instance. Has

it been strengthened? There is the belief in the in-

spiration of the Bible
;
belief in the power of God to

forgive sins; belief in a future life; belief in the

efficacy of prayer. Is any one of these beliefs

strengthened in its hold over our people? You

know better. They are all weakened.

Remember, it has been urged that if people

would cut loose from the creeds dictated by the

churches they would find their own beliefs. But it

hasn't worked out that way. For the most part, no

creed now takes the place of the church creeds

which have been abandoned. Instead of the aver-

age American's saying what he would have said

formerly, “I believe what my church teaches,” he

says today, if he speaks frankly, “I don’t know what

I believe; probably not much of anything.” And

what else was to be expected?

In the field of morality the results are equally

unfortunate. Millions of our people have been con-

verted to the notion that morality is a matter of in-

dividual opinion. And with what result? Has moral-

ity improved? Read the answer all about you. Read

it in the increased criminality. Read it in the pre-

vailing sex madness. Read it in the ever-increasing

number of broken homes and neglected children.

Read it in social strife and class hatred. Read it in

the degeneracy of literature. Read it in the inde-

cencies that are boldly hurled at us from all sides.



8 THE APPEAL TO REASON

Read it in the increasing unhappiness and discon-

tent.

The explanation is simple enough. When our

people forsook the moral codes laid down by the

churches they did not find new or better ones. For

the most part they merely drifted, drifted down-

ward. They became indifferent. In ever increasing

numbers they are using the freedom recommended

to them. They are doing as they please. Religious

motives gone, standards gone, sensitive consciences

gone, free reign is given to impulse, to appetite, and

to passion. And again I remind you that nothing

else was to be expected.

It has been similar with individualism in wor-

ship. We have been told, you know, that the way to

save the worship of God for enlightened persons

was to encourage them to worship in their own way.

I now ask if, as the result of this emancipation, wor-

ship has been improved? Do those persons who

have deserted church services worship more or less

devoutly than they did before?

You know the answer. There has been no substi-

tution; there has been only abandonment. For the

most part, no worship now takes the place of the

worship in church services which so many have giv-

en up. It sounds very well to talk about worshipping

God out in the woods and streams and mountains,

under the stars, and along the shore, as we have

heard so eloquently recommended; but it is seldom

done that way. It is all well and good to talk about

worshipping in the stillness of one’s room. And that

is a splendid Christian habit certainly, praying to

God in private. But who are the Christians who

have this habit? Those who worship in the churches

on Sunday. It sounds very well to talk about wor-



THE NEED FOR AUTHORITY 9

shipping God by reading the Bible
;
and that also is

a practice that is to be encouraged. But, unfor-

tunately, persons who do not hear the Bible read in

public services usually forget to read it in private.

The freedom from religious authority offered to

the American people has done nothing but destroy.

It hasn’t a single good accomplishment to its credit.

It has lured millions of persons away from the

creeds taught by the churches, and in place has left

them with no creed. It has lured them away from

the standards of morality prescribed by the church-

es, and in place has left them with no standards. It

has lured them away from worship as conducted in

church services, and in place has left them with no

worship. Faith destroyed, habits of morality weak-

ened, the worship of God abandoned; these are the

only results.

It is about time that we were thinking seriously

of turning back the other way. Most of you listen-

ing to me this afternoon deplore the tendencies of

which I speak. Many of you have boys and girls

growing up, and you are worried about what is hap-

pening to them. You would like to see some counter-

movement; something to stimulate religious faith,

something to elevate standards of morality, and

something to rekindle the worship of God. And you

are looking for that something. With real concern

you look about at the various efforts being made to

uplift society. You examine the programs of re-

formers, of writers, lecturers, and cultural leaders.

And, very candidly now, you shake your heads about

them. You know that they are failing. Conditions

become worse rather than better.

Under the circumstances, it is only reasonable

that we turn our minds to something that has been



10 THE APPEAL TO REASON

tried, to something that has saved human society in

many a former period of weakness, to the Christian

faith. To the best of my ability, I shall explain this

faith to you in the next six programs of the Catholic

Hour, hoping that to some slight degree I may do

justice to its dignity and to its right to your respect.



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST

Address delivered June 19, 1938.

In bringing before you this afternoon the Author

of Christianity, as my subject does, I propose to

examine the question of His identity. Who is He?

Is He divine or merely human? The importance of

the question can scarcely be over-emphasized. As no

religion can rise higher than its source, the Chris-

tian religion cannot be divine if its founder was

merely human.

That Christ lived nineteen hundred years ago is

merely a matter of history. That He was a great

and good man, that He lived a life of charity and

humility, and that He has had an unparalleled in-

fluence upon the course of civilization, are facts gen-

erally recognized even by those who are not of His

following. It is commdnplace to heap words of

praise upon Him, comparing Him in superlative

terms with other great men, always to His advan-

tage. Such comparisons, however, are unfair. They

beg the question, the very question that is to be ans-

wered. They presume that Christ is merely human.

For if He is divine, mere men cannot be compared

with Him.

By the divinity of Christ is meant something

very definite. It does not mean that Christ was

closer to God than other men, that He understood

God better, or that He obeyed God’s precepts more

perfectly. It does not mean that in purpose or inten-

tion He was one with God. By divinity is not

meant anything within the realm of human possi-

bilities. The divinity of Christ means the deity of

Christ. It means that He is a divine person, the



12 THE APPEAL TO REASON

Second Person of the Holy Trinity. It means that

He possesses two natures, the nature of God and the

nature of man. It means that God became incar-

nate, that is to say, that He came on earth, taking

human flesh and living for a time among men.

That Christ was truly man is now universally

recognized
;
so much so that it may surprise some of

you that one of the earliest heresies with which the

Church had to contend was the denial of His real

humanity. Today, as you know, the doubt is just

the contrary. It is His divinity that is now so widely

lost sight of. It is His divinity, therefore, that calls

for explanation and defense.

It may be suggested, contrary to my thesis, that

the divinity of Christ is so wholly above everything

human that it cannot be approached by human

reasoning. Let us correct that observation by

noting an important distinction, the distinction be-

tween natural and reasonable. The twTo, although

often confused, do not mean the same. Many

phenomena are above nature and yet are reason-

able. The divinity of Christ is supernatural, by very

definition
;
but it does not follow that it is unreason-

able.

The divinity of Christ is reasonable in that it

can be demonstrated as other truths can be. It is

reasonable because it fits in with the facts of his-

tory and the experience of the race. It is reasonable

because it satisfies, as nothing else can, the deepest

yearnings of the human soul.

For a moment now let us detach ourselves from

the historical record of things as they are and in-

dulge in a little speculating about things as they

should be. We start with man’s needs, tracing the
line from them back and up to God who alone can



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 13

satisfy them. It is only reasonable, I submit to

you, that there is a providential connection between

the two.

There is the need, first of all, for revealed truth,

for a few glimpses of God’s infinite knowledge to

help man rise above his own limitations. And in

what more fitting way could God bring this revela-

tion to man than by coming to earth and speaking

through the medium of a human nature? Identify-

ing Himself so that He could be recognized as God

by at least a few chosen followers, what a great

advantage would thus be given to His Gospel! It

would be left among men as a definite deposit from

which all later generations could draw.

Moreover, by coming to earth and assuming a

human nature, God could instruct a few followers

very thoroughly. By means of close and daily asso-

ciations He could give them special training, re-

hearsing with them the constitution of His religion

and preparing them to teach others. He could make

them the secondary source of all religious truths.

There is the need, secondly, for divine govern-

ment. And government means authority. We need
over us the authority of God; we need it in a form

easily recognized and readily respected. Note again

the appropriateness of the Incarnation. The author-

ity which God expects all men to acknowledge could

be brought to earth and made definite and concrete.

The incarnate God could form an organization, di-

rectly selecting its officials. Speaking through His

human lips, He could appoint them to be His agents,

to act for Him and in His name, delegating them to

perpetuate His authority by handing it on to their

successors.

There is the need, finally, for sanctification. In



14 THE APPEAL TO REASON

the nature of things we cannot save ourselves. We
can cooperate with God

;
indeed, we must do so. But

salvation itself is not a human attainment; it is a

gift from above.

The moment we speak of human cooperation, we

come upon the difficulty. It is difficult to worship

God, as you know well enough; difficult for one

thing, because God, being purely spiritual, is not a

visible object. Surrendering to this very difficulty,

pagan peoples have often made artificial images of

their false gods, thus placing before themselves

tangible objects of worship. The truth is that for

worship man needs the presence of God in some

visible form.

It is difficult too, indeed it is impossible, for

man to devise religious services that fully satisfy.

Anything that he himself creates is purely human.

Through the Incarnation, however, God could give

to man what he needs, means of worship that are

divine. Moreover, by the sacrifice of Himself, He

could demonstrate the value of penance and suffer-

ing; He could perpetuate the grace-giving sacrifice

so that all men of all time could draw help from it.

This reasoning does not demand that God dwell

among men indefinitely. Such a blessing is not

called for. All that is needed is that God should

dwell on earth for a time, long enough to instruct

a few followers in the doctrines of faith, create and

authorize His organization, and establish the

method and means of sanctification. And does not

such reasoning, I ask, bring us to the divinity of

Christ?

Perhaps it may be said here, by way of reserva-

tion, that the conclusion is not contained in the

premises. Granted that human nature needs the



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 15

Incarnation of God; does it necessarily follow that

God became incarnate? Let us see.

It is true, of course, that God could have chosen

other means of redeeming the human race. He

could have chosen other means of revealing truth;

other means of placing His authority in the world;

and other means of sanctifying human souls. Once

the reality of these needs is recognized, however, it

seems only reasonable that God should provide for

them
;

the author both of religion and of man,

surely He would adapt the one to the needs of the

other. And when those needs are analyzed, as they

can be, it seems that a most fitting way for God to

provide for them would be the Incarnation.

Perhaps it may be said, however, that such con-

siderations are far removed from the critical prob-

lems of historical evidence. Perhaps the appeal to

reason requires that the divinity of Christ be ex-

amined in the light of history. Very well; in open-

ing up this phase of the subject, however, I remind

you that in a discourse of a few minutes nothing

like an adequate treatment is possible. All I can do

is to indicate lines of thought, supported by a few

bits of evidence.

The historical record which comes closest to the

life of our Lord, which is indeed nearly contem-

porary, is contained in the New Testament; in the
Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St.

John, supplemented by the Epistles of St. Paul.

From these writings we learn about our Lord’s life,

death, and resurrection; we learn about His min-

istry, what He said and did
;
in particular, we learn

what He said of Himself.

This last point is of primary importance. Whom
did He claim to be? If He represented Himself



16 THE APPEAL TO REASON

merely as man, we should accept Him as such,

ruling out the thought of divinity. If He identified

Himself as God, however, what then? How should

we value such testimony?

In answering the question, let me assure you

that the statements I refer to are not isolated ones.

They are part and parcel of our Lord’s ministry;

they cannot be detached from it. His testimony

about Himself is as much a part of the Gospel He

preached as any other doctrine.

When He said, for instance, “I and the Father

are one,” He uttered a truth that fits in with every-

thing else. In and by itself it might present a

problem of interpretation. But in the light of

other statements it evidently refers to the union of

nature between our Lord and the Father. And pre-

cisely to prevent being misunderstood, our Lord

Himself added the explanation, “he that seeth me

seeth the Father.”

God alone can be worshipped; such is the clear

teaching of our Lord. And yet, knowing baptism

to be an act of worship, indeed intending it to be

such, our Lord commanded that it be administered

in His name, as well as in the name of the Father

and of the Holy Ghost. By so doing, He commanded

that He be worshipped.

On one occasion a sick man was brought to Him,

with a plea for restoration to health. Our Lord’s

words, “Thy sins are forgiven thee”, brought out an

immediate protest from the bystanders. “Who can

forgive sins”, they asked, “but God only?” This

challenge, our Lord met by persisting in His pur-

pose; not only that, but He performed a miracle in

proof of His claim. “But that you may know,” He

said, “that the Son of man hath power on earth to



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 17

forgive sins (He saith to the sick of the palsy). . .

Arise. . . and go into thy house”. Evidently, then,

He claimed for Himself the power to forgive sin,

the exclusive prerogative of God.

When brought before the court and accused of

blasphemy, He admitted frankly that He was the

Son of God. What He meant by the title is evident

from His further words and from the way He was

understood by the court. Indeed, it was because He

claimed to be divine that He was pronounced guilty

and condemned.

He described Himself as eternal, in the same

way that God the Father is described. He declared

that He possessed the same knowledge as the

Father, infinite knowledge. He declared that He

was the judge of all men, and that on the last day

He would separate the just from the unjust in

accordance with their love for Him. He performed

miracles in His own name, not as mere men must do

by acting in the name of God. He not only forgave

sins in His own right, but delegated others to for-

give, as His agents. When addressed as the Lord

and God, He expressed His approval. There are

many other indications of the same unique claim.

These are all that I have time to give
;
and they are

sufficient, I believe, for the present purpose.

Now let us appraise this testimony. It is one
thing, it may be said, for Christ to claim to be God,

and quite another thing for Him to be God. How
then, I ask, are we to judge Him? Was He insane?

Was He an impostor? Was He a self-deceived

fanatic? If He was none of these things, then, He

must have been a true witness about Himself.

That He was insane may be ruled out at once as

ridiculous. Similarly, that He was an impostor; all



18 THE APPEAL TO REASON

men agree that He was honorable, beyond question.

Could He then have been honestly deceived, fanati-

cally thinking Himself to be God? The record

shows not a sign of deception about Himself or any-

thing else; not an indication of fanaticism.

Positive proof of His truthfulness is provided

by His miracles, particularly by His resurrection

from the dead. It may as well be recognized that

God alone can put life into a dead body; such a re-

storation is wholly beyond the power of man or of

nature. And for God to raise a man back to life

again would be to mark that man with His public

approval. It would seem only reasonable, therefore,

in the light of His resurrection, that Christ was a

true witness about Himself, carrying God’s unmis-

takable endorsement.

What makes the conclusion all the stronger is

that our Lord predicted beforehand His resurrection

from the dead, even fixing the time within which it

would take place. For God to raise Him back to

life, under the circumstances, and fulfill His predic-

tion, would be misleading and unreasonable, if He

had been an impostor or a self-deceived fanatic.

The facts, my friends, cannot be fitted together if

our Lord’s testimony is left out. But when the tes-

timony is accepted, as it reasonably must be, then,

the divinity of our Lord is established.

That a truth of tremendous importance is thus

reached, no doubt you fully appreciate. It is a truth

with which nothing else can be compared. It is a

truth to which everything else must be related.

The claim of our Lord presents itself to each of

us; it calls for decision; it creates obligations. By

its very nature it changes us from what we were



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 19

before. It leaves the world different from what it

otherwise would have been.

Logically speaking, and assuredly with no re-

flection on any one's honesty, there can be no com-

promise about our Lord. Either He is to be accepted

for what He claimed to be, or He is to be condemned

for claiming to be what He was not. Between the

two extremes there is no possible reconciliation.

Logically speaking, again, the claim of our Lord

cuts clean
;
it separates believer from unbeliever.

The degree of acceptance demanded by our Lord

is extreme. It is complete. It can be no half-way

attitude. It is not the mere intellectual appreciation

of Christ as a great teacher or philosopher or relig-

ious leader. It is not the endorsement of His code of

ethics. It is not even the imitation of His unselfish

manner of living. Above and beyond these, it is

accepting Him as God. It is believing in Him, obey-

ing Him, and worshipping Him. It is knowing,

serving, and loving Him for life, and hoping to

possess Him as the reward for all eternity.



THE DIVINITY OF THE CHURCH

Address delivered June 26, 1938.

In the midst of present day disorders and tur-

moil, it is but prudent to look for the way out, the

way of salvation from impending ruin. It is but pru-

dent to look to God for guidance. In the very nature

of His relationship with us, He must have a program

to secure us against evils such as those we are now

cursed with, wars, communism, economic depres-

sions, slavery, race suicide, and others similar. To

say merely that the program calls for human obedi-

ence to God’s will is to state it too abstractly. God’s

will is not something far off in heaven and remote

from human affairs. It is here with us, identified

with something concrete, with human leadership,

in brief, with an institution.

If I say that this institution is none other than

the Christian Church, you, some of you at least, will

hesitate before giving assent. You will propose ques-

tions. By what authority, you will ask, does the

Church presume to lead us? What right has she to

our allegiance? Does she understand our problems?

Can we not get along some way without her? These

are pertinent questions
;
they require attention. They

are all included, however, in one question that is

primary: Is the Church divine or. merely human?

If the Church is divine, we can be sure that her

leadership, conceived in the mind of God Himself,

is essential to the welfare of His human creatures.

If she is only human, however, we can be sure of

nothing, save only that we must look for something

else.

In answering this question, as I shall do this aft-

ernoon, let me assure you that I am not trying to



THE DIVINITY OF THE CHURCH 21

belittle those who disagree. I am trying merely to

present the Catholic explanation of the Church, hop-

ing that it will appear reasonable and convincing.

The explanation begins by noting the parallel

between the Church and our Lord. He established

the Church to perform His ministry, to do among

men of all time what He was doing for a very few

men at the moment. Taking His place, the Church

partakes, to a certain degree, of His power and

character. Being like Him, as she must be, she at-

tracts the same friendship, the same loyalty and

devotion, that He attracted
;
and, by the same token,

she arouses the same opposition and hatred. To un-

derstand the Church, then, it is necessary first to

understand Christ.

Now Christ is a divine person, possessing two

distinct natures, the nature of God and the nature of

man. Any attempt to interpret Him with one of

these natures left out or obscured does violence, I

believe, to the historical record. To try to picture

Him as divine merely, for instance, rules out the

clear facts of His humanity; the fact that He could

be seen and heard and touched
;
that He walked, that

He wept, that He hungered
;
and, in particular, that

He suffered and died. These and similar facts de-

scribe a man. On the other hand, to judge that He

was human merely, that He was man but not God,

is equally inaccurate. It closes the mind to the facts

of His divinity; the fact that He forgave sins, for

instance; that He claimed to be eternal, infinite in

knowledge, and the judge of all men; that He de-

manded to be worshipped; and, in particular, that

He arose from the dead in fulfillment of His predic-

tion. These facts describe God.

In criticizing the contemporaries of our Lord,



22 THE APPEAL TO REASON

those who failed to recognize His dual character, let

us not be too uncharitable. They made a mistake

that is common and natural, trying to find a simple

and single explanation to fit Him. We ourselves
might have made the same mistake. Had we been

in His presence nineteen hundred years ago we

might have been tempted, along with others, to re-

gard Him merely as a man. If so, we would have

protested whenever He acted as God.

It is not necessary, however, to imagine our-

selves back in our Lord’s presence in order to test

our attitude toward Him. We have plenty of oppor-
tunities today. How we would have judged Him

nineteen centuries ago may be indicated fairly well

by how we judge His Church here and now.

At this moment, at every moment in fact, we are

in the presence of the Church. We are contemporar-
ies of her ministry. We know that she claims divine
agency to forgive sins, for instance. Are we critical ?

Perhaps we say that only God can forgive and,

therefore, that the Church is unreasonable and in-

consistent. We listen to her claim of perpetuity.

Perhaps we point to the decay and passing of other

religions as precedents for her. We witness modern

persecutions of the Church. Perhaps we join the

scoffers and challenge her, if she be from God, to

come down from the cross and save herself.

There is no understanding the Church if she has

but one nature. There is no explanation that makes

sense. If that alleged single nature is divine, for

instance, there is no possible way of explaining the

facts of her humanity; the fact that her members

may fall into sin, that her officials may use poor

judgment, and, in particular, that in whole countries

she may be annihilated. These facts describe some-



THE DIVINITY OF THE CHURCH 23

thing human. On the other hand, if the single na-

ture of the Church is human there is no way of

explaining the facts of her divinity; the fact that

she teaches infallibly, that she has divine authority,

that she forgives sin, that she has the Real Presence,

and, in particular, that she comes back to life and

health again after each crucifixion. These facts de-

scribe something divine.

The distinction between these two natures in and

by itself is perfectly clear. It can scarcely be mis-

understood. The problem arises, as it seems to arise

for many persons, when these two natures are

brought together, as of necessity they must be, by

and in the Church. How, it is asked, how can one

and the same institution be both divine and human ?

No doubt, this very question is put to me this after-

noon by some of you. Very well; I am glad to ex-

plain.

Before calling attention once more to the parallel

between the Church and Christ, by which the prob-

lem is solved, I must digress for a moment to explain

something else. It is true that the Church, being like

our Lord, has two distinct natures, the human and

the divine. It does not follow, however, that these

natures of the Church are exactly the same as the

parallel natures of Christ. In each case there are

clear differences.

The human nature of our Lord, as I need scarcely

tell you, was perfect. It had none of the weaknesses

and defects which mark the nature of other men.

At all times it was perfectly conformable to the mind

and will of God, the Father. The human nature of

the Church, however, as again is obvious, is im-

perfect. Made up of human beings, the laity and

the clergy, it reflects the frailty of this membership

;



24 THE APPEAL TO REASON

it displays the characteristics of other human insti-

tutions.

The difference in respect to the divine nature is

likewise clear. With our Lord, the divine nature

means deity itself. It means that He is God, possess-

ing all the divine attributes in their infinite com-

pleteness. With the Church, however, the divine na-

ture means merely partaking of certain divine at-

tributes, those necessary for her to function in God’s

place. There need be no confusion here. I am not

saying, and would not think of saying even in the

most figurative language, that the Church is God.

I am saying, however, that the Church, as the

spokesman of God, possesses divine attributes. In

this respect she is like Him; in this respect she has

a divine nature.

It is from this point of view, and this only, I be-

lieve, that the Church can be correctly understood.

Let there be no attempt to minimize the reality of

her divinity, by softening it to meet critical opinion.

Let there be no attempt to minimize the reality of

her humanity, by covering up the mistakes of her

people and leaders. Let each nature be fully and

correctly appraised for what it is.

That the Church is human would seem to be so

obvious as to require no proof. And yet, strange to

say, it is many times overlooked. Precisely as the

first Christian heretics tried to suppress the human-

ity of our Lord, later Christians, particularly new

converts, are sometimes inclined to minimize the

humanity of the Church. Being a convert myself,

I understand this inclination. In our first zeal and

enthusiasm for the faith we find it difficult to under-

stand how anything in the Church can be imperfect.

And we are tempted to deny the evidence, the his-



THE DIVINITY OF THE CHURCH 25

torical and present-day evidence, of human weak-

ness. In time, of course, we gain our balance. In-

creasingly conscious of our own imperfections, as

well as those of others, and noting that the Church

is not contaminated by them, we come eventually to

the point of view of those born and raised as Cath-

olics. It is a clear appreciation of the fact that the

divinity of the Church is not and cannot be compro-

mised by anything her people and leaders may do.

The mistake that is commonly made today, how-

ever, is precisely the contrary
;
it is to overlook, not

the human side, but the divine side of the Church.

It is to this, therefore, that we must give attention.

The divinity of the Church is disclosed in her

ability to rise above things human. And here again

we start with our divine Lord. While on earth

among men, He performed three functions; teach-

ing, ruling, and sanctifying. And the Church, being

set in the world to take His place, performs the same

three functions. Presumably, therefore, it is in re-

spect to these very functions that the Church par-

takes of divine attributes.

Let me explain here that I cannot discuss all of

these in one address. Next week, I shall discuss the

function of governing
;
and in the two following ad-

dresses, that of sanctifying. This afternoon I shall

devote my remaining moments to the function of

teaching. I shall explain how the Church, in teach-

ing the Gospel, partakes of a divine attribute.

It is human to make mistakes. And if the Church

were human only, she would make many mistakes.

But she was appointed to teach. To the Apostles and

all later officials of the Church, our Lord gave the

explicit command to teach all nations and to preach

the Gospel to every creature. He declared, more-



26 THE APPEAL TO REASON

over, that the Gospel they preached was essential to

salvation. He said, “He that heareth you, hearth

me” . . . “As the Father hath sent me, I also send

you” . . . “He that believeth not, shall be con-

demned.” It follows that the officials of the Church

are bound to preach the Gospel correctly
;
otherwise,

our Lord could not make it a requisite for eternal

salvation.

Furthermore, He guaranteed them to the world.

He promised that the gates of hell would not pre-

vail against His Church. And one of His Apostles,

St. Paul, in the inspired writings, described the

Church as the “pillar and ground of the truth”,

“holy and without blemish”. In these statements

there is contained divine assurance that the Church

is infallible.

But the Church, it may be pointed out, is made

up of men. And how can men be infallible? Depend-

ing upon their own resources, upon human wisdom

and human experience? Certainly not. No matter

how wise and learned they may become, they can

never attain infallibility. For all of their learning

they remain human and, being human, they are

liable to error. How, then, can they be set before

the world by our Lord as infallible teachers? Only

if and as He Himself makes them so.

This fact cannot be stated too clearly. The in-

fallibility of the Church is not a human virtue. In

no sense is it to be credited to the men themselves,

those who at the moment happen to be the officials

of the Church. Infallibility is a gift from above ; it

is a divine and supernatural protection given to the

officials when they pronounce a doctrine of faith or

morals.

Can we be sure that they are so protected? Our



THE DIVINITY OF THE CHURCH 27

Lord Himself said at the very moment He commis-

sioned them to teach, '‘And behold I am with you

all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

Once again, when comforting them against His de-

parture, He promised that the Holy Ghost, the spirit

of truth, would come to them and abide with them

forever. He promised that the Holy Ghost would

teach them all things and recall to them all that He

had taught.

It is precisely because of the presence and help

of the Holy Ghost that the Church can rise above the

human weaknesses which otherwise would corrupt

her teachings. That she does so is confirmed by her

record. There have been times, a few at least, when

the leaders of the Church were affected adversely by

the low standards of the society in which they lived.

They made grievous mistakes. But, and here is the

unique fact, in not one instance was a Church doc-

trine affected.

Do you not appreciate how extraordinary this

is? You know how easy it is for nations and insti-

tutions to accommodate their principles to the prac-

tice of their leaders; how easy it is for them to

allow a mistake to become a tradition which they

seek to excuse and defend; how easy it is for them

to be compromised by the personalities of their offi-

cials. But with the Church there is this singular

difference; not once has the human weakness of a

leader or that of millions of members been trans-

lated into a doctrine. The doctrines themselves, in

spite of nineteen centuries of preaching through hu-

man lips, have remained on the same super-human

plane where they were first placed by our Lord

Himself. And here, my friends, is one indication of

the divinity of the Church.



28 THE APPEAL TO REASON

It is because the Church is divine that she has a

rightful claim upon our allegiance. Because she is

divine, she is able to point the world to the path of

salvation.



THE APOSTOLICITY OF THE CHURCH

Address delivered July 3, 1938.

There is something impressive and inspiring in

the unbroken history of the Church. For nineteen

centuries now, without a moment’s interruption, she

has been ministering to the souls of those entrusted

to her. More than the mere accumulation of wisdom

and experience, the Church enjoys the advantage of

physical continuity. Her organization today is united

in an unbroken line with the organization that was

established nineteen centuries ago.

To appreciate how remarkable this is, you need

merely review the experiences of nations and em-

pires over the course of the same centuries. How
many dynasties have come and gone! How many

apparently solid governments have fallen ! How

many constitutions have been scrapped and replaced

by radically different ones! There have been so

many changes in recent generations that our own

nation, which is one of the youngest, has today one

of the oldest constitutions.

In marked contrast is the experience of the

Church. Her constitution remains the same. At no

time has it been altered or remade. The organiza-

tion likewise, and it is to this that my subject calls

attention, has remained the same. Not once has it

been found obsolete and unadaptable. Not once has

the Church been compelled to start anew, even if

that were possible.

Whenever the record of the Church is thus held

up for approval, criticism of the opposite type is

suggested. This is but natural, I suppose, and is to

be expected. So while I have been praising the



30 THE APPEAL TO REASON

Church, no doubt some of you listening to me have

recalled historical episodes in which the conduct of

Church leaders was anything but exemplary. In

fairness, you feel perhaps that this side of the record

should at least be noted.

I understand your point of view. I was once a

non-Catholic, and I did my full share of criticising
the Church for the misdeeds of her leaders. What I

did not see at first, however, and what so many

others fail to see, is that these misdeeds constitute

a peculiarly strong argument in favor of the Church,

rather than against her. Because of this very type

of thing, as you know quite well, the governments

of nations have fallen and will continue to fall. Sup-

pose, by way of imagining the impossible, that a

government could have perfect administration, with

its officials always doing the right thing, always

using perfect judgment, and at all times living

blameless lives
;
it would last indefinitely. For such

a government to persevere from one generation to

another would certainly not be remarkable.

Let this fact be fully appreciated whenever the

conduct of Catholic leaders is criticized. Then let

the case against them be made as strong as possible.

Let the truth be supplemented by imaginary tales

and irresponsible accusations, such as those which

have been invented so many times. Do you not see

that such criticisms make the perseverence of the

Church more remarkable than ever? If only a few

of the things said against her are true, the unbroken

continuity of her organization for nineteen centuries

appears as an unparalleled miracle. It is by this

very record, unique among all institutions and con-

trary to all human experience, that the Church is set

aside and marked as something more than human.



THE APOSTOLICITY OF THE CHURCH 31

To some of you, if I may judge correctly from

modern comments, it seems objectionable that relig-

ion should be identified with an organization. And

your point of view, while it is by no means general,

is important enough to deserve comment. Idealizing

purely spiritual things, you prefer that the Christian

religion be detached from everything physical.

Now it is quite true that spiritual things come
first. The catechism studied by Catholic children

teaches them to give more care to their souls than

to their bodies. Even so, the body is not to be neg-

lected. Similarly, with the Christian religion. Let

the spirit of Christianity be placed first, if any one

is interested in an order of precedence. Let the

spiritual union of the human mind and will with

the mind and will of Christ be emphasized above the

place and functioning of the Church organization.

Even so, the organization remains a necessity.

Reason tells us that the human soul is not com-

plete without its body. So the soul of Christianity

is not complete without its body, the organization.

Without the body, how could the soul function? How

could Christian truths be taught and preserved?

How could questions about the meaning of the Gos-

pel be answered? How could the mind and will of

our Lord be known? How could the divinely estab-

lished means of grace be administered? These and

similar queries reveal the necessity for the organiza-

tion.

For this conclusion we are not dependent upon

human reasoning. While it is my purpose in this

series of addresses to explain Catholic doctrines as

they appeal to reason, I feel no hesitancy in turning

to history for confirmation. And so, concerning the



32 THE APPEAL TO REASON

nature of the Church, I draw upon the record of

early Christianity as found in the New Testament.

Therein is described a very concrete organiza-

tion. It had its officials, for instance, a board of

managers and a president. It administered property.

It appointed certain men to collect and distribute

alms. It selected preachers. It held official meetings

in which were debated matters of law and policy.

It sent delegates from one community to another.

It performed ceremonies. It held a rite of initiation.

It chose new officials when they were needed. In

brief, it did everything an organization ordinarily

does.

If a question be raised about the origin of this

organization, whether from God or from man, it can

be answered from the same historical record. The

earliest Christians, those who were contemporaries

of our Lord and who surely understood the constitu-

tion which He gave His Church, believed that He

Himself established the organization. They declared

that He personally appointed the first officials and

instructed them in their duties.

Their testimony may be supplemented by the

words of our Lord. One quotation will suffice

:

“Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth,” He said,

“it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever

thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in

heaven.” This declaration He made on two occa-

sions, once to the officials as a group and once to

their chief alone. It means, evidently, that our Lord

gave to them governmental authority, power to make

laws, power to interpret the constitution, and gen-

eral power to administer the affairs of the Church.

On other occasions He specified other powers,

granted to the same men. He commissioned them,



THE APOSTOLICITY OF THE CHURCH 33

for instance, to teach and preach the Gospel. He

gave them the right to administer certain means of

grace. In brief, it may be said that He designated

them to be His official representatives.

These officials, the first bishops of the Church,

were the original twelve Apostles. For them, per-

haps as a mark of special reverence because of their

close association with our Lord, the term “Apostle”

has been more or less exclusively reserved. In this

reservation are included, with the original twelve,

St. Paul, to whom our Lord appeared later, and

usually also St. Barnabas. Thereafter, however, the

term Apostle is abandoned and the term bishop is

retained.

The apostolicity of the Church, which is my

subject for this afternoon, means that the Church

was built upon the Apostles. It means that in the

beginning the Church was governed by them, and

that in succeeding generations she has been governed

by their legal successors. Incidentally, it has a fur-

ther meaning, relative to preaching the Gospel, but

that is aside from my purpose this afternoon.

To the Apostles, our Lord entrusted the duty

of choosing successors. And their very first act, it

is significant to note, at least the first act of which

we have any record, was to choose a bishop to fill

the place left vacant by Judas. One by one they chose

others as they were needed, so that when they were

all gone their places had been filled. These newer

bishops in turn appointed others to take their places.

Generation after generation the process has been

repeated. And thus the authority given by our Lord

to the original Apostles has been brought down to

us at this very moment.

Because of its importance, there need be no



34 THE APPEAL TO REASON

surprise that the consecration of a bishop, the pro-

cess of which I have been speaking, was elevated by

our Lord to the dignity of a sacrament. In it, God

not only appoints a new agent but also gives him the

grace and supernatural help which he will need.

Most appropriately, furthermore, the contract be-

tween God and the new bishop is expressed in out-

ward signs, in words and gestures, both ancient and

symbolic
;
and all in an atmosphere of solemnity and

holiness.

Particularly to be noted, because of its signifi-

cance, is the “laying on of hands.” The consecrating

bishop lays his hands on the head of the priest whom

he is consecrating. He himself, only a few years be-

fore, knelt before another bishop, whose hands simi-

larly were placed on his head. And the latter had on

a previous occasion felt the touch of yet another

bishop. Back generation by generation this contact

can be traced, back finally into the presence of the

Apostles as they were consecrated by our Lord Him-

self.

Not without reason, then, has the apostolic suc-

cession, so vital to the existence of the Church, been

the object of special attacks from the powers of

evil. If only it could be stopped ! If only the conse-

cration of new bishops could be prevented, even for

the span of a human life time! If only all of the

bishops in the world could be simultaneously de-

stroyed ! The end would be in sight. Because bishops

alone can confer the Sacrament of Orders, no new

bishops could be consecrated. For the same reason,

no more priests could be ordained. There being no

new priests to replace those who die each year, it

would be only a matter of time until there would be

no one left to say Mass, no one to hear confessions,



THE APOSTOLICITY OF THE CHURCH 35

and no one to give Communion. And the lay Chris-

tians, those who might escape the persecution, being

left without the Sacraments and the Mass, would

be sure to lose their faith in time. Moreover, they

would be helpless to restore what had been lost.

The great plan of Christ would thus have been

brought to an inglorious close.

As I speak these words, you are reminded no

doubt of present day persecutions. Very probably

you call to mind the laws in certain countries which

forbid the Church to have seminaries wherein to

train priests. You recall laws which simultaneously

forbid priests to come in from other countries. You

recall the policies which exile and even destroy

priests and bishops. You recall, also, the efforts

made to arouse censure in your own mind for those

who are being persecuted. You need not be deceived

about what is back of it all. It is the hope of the

powers of evil, instinctively shrewd in their choice

of means, to strike the Church at a vital point. If

body and soul can be separated, the Church will die.

If the organization of the Church can be destroyed,

her spirit will fly away.

It was against this very calamity that our Lord

gave us His assurance : “Upon this rock I will build

my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail

against it” . . . “Behold I am with you all days, even

to the consummation of the world.” Thus divinely

and supernaturally protected, the Church cannot be

destroyed. Although her bishops may be driven out

of one country, there always remain others in some

other country. They are ready and waiting to con-

secrate new bishops and send them back at the first

favorable moment. No persecution of the Church



36 THE APPEAL TO REASON

has been or can be so general as to annihilate all at

the same time.

Last week I spoke of the divinity of the Church,

pointing out that for the performance of her mission

she partakes of certain divine attributes. By way

of illustration I mentioned the privilege of infallibil-

ity, by virtue of which the Church is able to teach

the Gospel. Her divinity is further illustrated by

what I have discussed today, the continuity of her

organization. If the Church were human only she

would have collapsed centuries ago, the victim of

human weakness and merciless persecution
;
but she

has proved to be immune to the diseases that destroy

everything else. That she lives today, that she is

young and vigorous, full of promise for the future,

is to be credited to the divinity with which her

human nature is united. And for this blessing every

Christian should daily thank Almighty God.



THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS

Address delivered July 10, 1938.

It is the purpose of the Church to bring man and

God together; to lift man up to God and to bring

God down to man. It is to help man worship; to

adore God, thank Him for His benefits, beg forgive-

ness of sins, and present petitions for spiritual and

physical blessings. More than all this, however, in-

finitely more, the purpose of the Church is to bring

to man God's response to worship.

It is but natural that prayer be expressed in

some outward form. Man is body as well as soul.

The two parts are intimately united, so much so that

what affects the one affects the other also. So it is

that while prayer comes from the soul, as of course

it must, it finds expression through the body. It

may be expressed in words or in gestures
;
in music

or in other forms of art; or in ceremonies which

combine all of these.

The outward expression of prayer is not needed

in order to attract God’s attention, as some pagans

seem to think; neither, to give information to God,

as might sometimes appear. God knows the inter-

ior workings of man’s soul as well as the actions of

his body, just as He knows everything else. When

you think a prayer, when you think, for instance, “0

God, have mercy on me a sinner,” or “Give me cour-

age to endure grief and hardship,” God knows all

about it. He knows, furthermore, the degree of your

sincerity, whether you are deserving of His help or

not. Nothing further is needed, insofar as God is

concerned.

Something further is needed for you, however,



38 THE APPEAL TO REASON

and that is expression. If prayerful thoughts and

feelings are shut up within you and closely stifled,

they die. You quickly cease to pray. On the other

hand, if you express your prayer you become more

earnest. Your faith is increased, your will power is

strengthened, and your love for God is intensified.

Expression makes for more perfect worship. And

the more perfect the worship, the greater is God’s

reward. He proportions His grace to man’s cooper-

ation.

One function of religious ceremonies is thus in-

dicated; it is to help man in his approach to God.

There is another function, however, more pertinent

to our subject this afternoon, and that is to bring

God’s response to man’s approach.

If it is natural for man to put his prayers in an

outward form, and we know that it is, it is but nat-

ural for him, also, to look for an answer to them,

likewise identified with an outward form. The peni-

tents who came to our divine Lord, in love and in

sorrow for their sins, wanted to hear “thy sins are

forgiven thee.” They would not have been satisfied

by merely thinking that they were forgiven; they

would not have been satisfied by reminding them-

selves that they were truly sorry and, therefore, de-

served to be forgiven. They wanted to hear, with

their physical ears, the words of forgiveness spoken

audibly by our Lord.

It is similar with men generally. They want

outward assurance that God hears them; a demon-

stration that He has provided for them; an indica-

tion that He grants their petitions. They ask not

to be left to judge for themselves that they are

blessed from above, or that they deserve to be bles-

sed. This craving for a sign, no less than the desire



THE SACRAMENTS 39

for self-expression, has been at all times a major

influence in various religions, driving men ahead to

find or invent or beg from God forms of worship

which satisfy.

How far, we now ask, can men go in creating for

themselves what they need? The answer is to be

found in the history of religions
;
it is to be found in

partial successes and in more definite failures.

As the means of expressing worship, natural

gestures, as is to be expected, have freely been

drawn upon. Kneeling, for instance, because it ex-

presses humility, is a religious ceremony. Bowing

the head, likewise, striking the breast, clasping the

hands, extending the arms, uncovering the head,

. and similar acts, precisely because they are expres-

sive symbols, have become religious ceremonies.

Singing is universal as a ceremony of praise. More

comprehensive is the offering of gifts and sacrifices.

The list which could be added to these is all but un-

limited.

Concerning these ceremonies, the only just ver-

dict is that they are not adequate. The motives

which underlie them may be commendable; and the

human resourcefulness which they display is amaz-

ing. But the results are not satisfactory. Man can-

not devise a ceremony that perfectly expresses the

worship of God.

What, then, of a ceremony to express God's re-

sponse to worship ? This would seem to be even fur-

ther removed from man’s capabilities. It may be

taken for granted, of course, that if men at all times

had been left without religious directions from

God, they would have found many expressive cere-

monies. Some of them, no doubt, would be more or

less adequate, adequate as symbols. To illustrate:



40 THE APPEAL TO REASON

water is universally used for cleansing the body. It

seems only reasonable, therefore, that men would

think of using it in a ceremony to symbolize cleans-

ing the soul. They would look upon it as a sign of

God's forgiveness.

Without my illustrating further, you will recall

other ceremonies which are suggested by human

needs. And it is reasonable to judge that even with-

out directions from God they would have been

thought of and used by man. To be sure, there

would be no uniformity either in their use or under-

standing
;
and there would be never-ending changes.

Furthermore, some of the ceremonies would become

fantastic and grotesque, and even indecent; precise-

ly as pagan religions have demonstrated.

It should be evident, however, that no matter

how ingenious man may be in devising ceremonies,

he is utterly helpless to make them anything more

than ceremonies. To some extent he can find sym-

bols of God's grace; but he cannot put God's grace

into them.

You see the point at once. Man prays to God

for help, not for the mere appearance of help. He

asks for and needs an answer, not the symbol of an

answer. He is to be saved by God’s grace, not by the

sign of grace.

So it is that if man's religious needs are to be

fully ministered to, God Himself must provide the

ministry. And we may be confident that He does so.

As I have remarked repeatedly in this series of ad-

dresses, God is the author both of religion and of

man; surely He relates the one to the needs of the

ether.

On this reasoning, Christianity, if it comes from

God, and we may be sure that it does, must provide



THE SACRAMENTS 41

God-given forms of religion. And these, my friends,

are the Sacraments. They are not the expression of

man’s worship, although they are related to it. They

are not mere signs of God’s answer to worship, al-

though they are excellent signs. Over and above ex-

pressions and signs, they are channels of grace.

There are seven Sacraments: Baptism, Confir-

mation, Penance, Holy Eucharist, Holy Orders, Mat-

rimony, and Extreme Unction. That they were

established by our Lord Himself, and entrusted by

Him to the care of the Church is evident from the

fact that they have been in the Church from the

beginning. They could not have come from any

other source.

Time does not permit a discussion of our Lord’s

authorship of all of the Sacraments. Neither is it

necessary. As a matter of fact, I have already

spoken about the Sacrament of Orders; and in my

next two addresses I shall discuss the Sacraments of

the Eucharist and Matrimony. So for today I shall

limit my attention and very brief attention at that,

to Baptism and Penance, as illustrations of the

others.

On one occasion our Lord said to His Apostles,

and through them to their successors, “Going there-

fore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the

name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

Ghost.” In these words the divine institution of

Baptism would seem to be clearly indicated. It is

nothing less than a command.

What is to be said, however, about the nature of

Baptism? Since the use of water is an appropriate

sign of cleansing, it seems that our Lord intended

it as a sign of cleansing the soul from sin. But is

that all that He intended? Does it seem reasonable?



42 THE APPEAL TO REASON

Would our Lord command the performance of a

mere symbol, form without substance? Is there

anything in His whole ministry to warrant such an

opinion ?

Our Lord Himself gives the answer: “Who be-

lieveth and is baptized shall be saved.” “Unless a

man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he

cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Evidently,

then, Baptism is a means of salvation, chosen and

used for that purpose by our Lord. Evidently it is

far more than a symbol
;
it is a cause of grace.

As a second illustration take the Sacrament of

penance, that in which sins committed after Bap-

tism are forgiven. That our Lord appointed priests

to be His agents in hearing confessions is evident

both from His own words and the practice of the

early Church. Again we ask: Did He intend that

they perform merely an outward sign?

No one is or can be forgiven who is not truly

sorry for his sins. The penitent in confession, there-

fore, must sincerely and sorrowfully come for God’s

forgiveness. Is he to be met by a mere sign of for-

giveness, an empty symbol? The words of the

priest, “I absolve you from your sins,” are perfect

as a sign. But is that all that they are?

Again our Lord gives the answer. To His priests,

those who stood before Him and those who live to-

day, He said, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are

forgiven them
;
and whose sins you shall retain, they

are retained.” Note, He did not say, “Whose sins

you shall appear to forgive appear to be forgiven.”

He said, rather, that they are forgiven. All of this

means that the Sacrament of Penance, in which the

priest is the agent of God, is the channel through

which God forgives. From similar facts and by sim-



THE SACRAMENTS 43

ilar reasoning the divine authorship of the other

Sacraments is proved.

Because of the occasional criticism that the Sac-

raments are superficial forms, I explain their func-

tioning a little more fully. And for the purpose I

use a rather homely analogy, one which although not

perfect, is close enough to throw some light on the

subject. Suppose that you write a letter. There is a

three-fold cooperation, of you, the pen, and the

paper. You, of course, are the author of the letter.

But both pen and paper, also, are necessary. And

each must be under your control. The pen must be

guided by your mind and hand,
4
* otherwise it can

write nothing. The paper, likewise, must be open

to you. If it is buried under books, or if it is too

badly soiled, it cannot be written on.

You see what I mean. For yourself, substitute

God; for the pen, put the Sacraments; and for the

paper, put the human soul. It is desired that God

should write a message on the soul, giving or in-

creasing sanctifying grace. God alone can write

that message. He is free, be it noted furthermore,

to choose His method; and He chooses the Sacra-

ments. To be useful, the Sacrament must be under

His control; otherwise, it is a mere outward sign.

And the human soul must be open to God. If there

are obstacles between it and Him, if it is black with

unrepented sin, it can not receive His help.

It is because one or another of these factors is

overemphasized that the efficacy of the Sacraments

is misjudged. God’s part can be exaggerated, for

instance, by saying that He gives grace regardless

of man’s dispositions. And this is wholly unreason-

able. If a person should receive Baptism, for in-

stance, while intending to live in sin, certainly he



44 THE APPEAL TO REASON

would get no good from it. If he should go to con-

fession, not promising to avoid future sins, he would

not be forgiven. Similarly with each of the other

Sacraments. God’s part is essential, of course
;
it is

the primary requisite. But God’s part is not all.

The function of the Sacrament, likewise, may be

exaggerated. To say, for instance, that it produces

its effect through psychological appeal or through

impressive symbolism, or to regard it as a trick of

magic, is wholly wrong. It -seeks to remove the Sac-

rament from the realm of religion.

Finally, the contribution of the soul can be over-

played. It is true, as I have insisted, that the soul

must approach God and must remove the obstacles

in the way. But to go further and declare that good

dispositions of the soul alone are sufficient is to de-

clare that something merely human has become di-

vine. Moreover, it disregards the plan of God. After

all, if He established the Sacraments and com-

manded that they be received, it would seem unreas-

onably rash for man to ignore them and depend

solely upon himself. No matter how perfect his dis-

positions may be, they are only human. They are

not and cannot be the cause of grace. That is a gift

from God. Good dispositions are necessary, but so

also are the Sacraments
;
made necessary by the will

of God.

Perhaps it is unnecessary for me to add, but I do

so for fear of being misunderstood, that the Sacra-

ments of the Church are not substitutes for prayer.

Catholics are instructed to obtain God’s help in both

ways, through prayer and the Sacraments. Each is

an aid to the other. And, if we may judge from out-

ward signs, those Catholics who most frequently re-

reive the Sacraments give the most time to daily



THE SACRAMENTS 45

prayer. In the practical test of effect upon life,

therefore, it can be said that the Sacraments, among

other benefits, stimulate prayer among Catholic

people.

To Catholics listening to me I conclude with this

word. When you receive a Sacrament you are tak-

ing your part in a divine plan. You are fulfilling a

condition made by our Lord nineteen centuries ago,

by which you are to obtain special help from Him.

His promises are unfailing. Eagerly you should

take advantage of them.

As an infant, you were met with a Sacrament.

At the close of life, your soul will be comforted by

another Sacrament. Between the two, at all great

moments of life and in all unfortunate defeats, you

are met with other appropriate Sacraments. They

are God’s way of lifting you above the world, of

holding you close to Himself, and ultimately of sav-

ing your soul.



THE REAL PRESENCE

Address delivered July 17, 1938.

Man’s relationship with God, speaking historic-

ally, may be divided into three periods, each defi-

nitely marked both in time and by distinctive

characteristics. These periods, before, during, and

after our Lord’s dwelling on earth, tell the story

of progressive opportunities given to man for union

with God.

In the first period men struggled along as best

\they could without God’s presence amon(g them.

Yielding to the need for tangible objects of worship,

pagan peoples frequently made idols out of wood

and stone and metal. These idols, although merely

the products of their own handiwork, they set before

them and worshipped, attributing to them super-

natural powers. The worshippers of the true God,

however, while often tempted, were forbidden to

stoop to idolatry. To them, God had revealed Him-

self as a spirit. Their need for Him as a concrete

object of worship thus had to await the unfolding

of the plan of redemption.

In their desire to adore God, men at all times

have turned to the offering of sacrifices. Buf from

their own resources they could find nothing perfect

to offer. Their gifts, such as food and animals, al-

though the best they had, were only natural. Even

the sacrifices which God Himself prescribed were

imperfect. The instinctive need for a perfect sacri-

fice thus pointed ahead, ahead to something which

man hoped for and was being helped to expect.

There was the need, also, for communion with

God. Commonly, this found expression by the vari-



THE REAL PRESENCE 47

ous religions in ceremonies wherein the communi-

cants took as food the gifts which had been offered

on the altars of sacrifice. Thus they symbolized a

mystical union with the deities whom they had

sought to please. Not fully satisfying, of course,

such ceremonies prefigured the perfect communion

which was to come.

The second period began with the coming of our

divine Lord. From the first days in Bethlehem,

when He was visited by the shepherds and the wise

men, to the last moment on the mount of ascension,

when He was taken up from the midst of the Apos-

tles, He was the object of worship. To Him, men

came for truth and forgiveness. From Him, they

begged grace for their souls and miracles for their

bodies. Before Him, they knelt down in adoration,

pouring out the deepest love of their hearts.

With a few faithful souls to mourn Him, our

Lord offered Himself as the victim on the cross of

Calvary. Here at last was the perfect sacrifice. The

object offered to God was infinite, being none other

than our Lord Himself. Those who knew Him for

what He was, those who were brave enough to stay

with Him to the end, joined their sacrifice to His.

They gave up everything that was dear and precious

to them. Never before had man offered, or even

been in the presence of, such a sacrifice.

The presence of our Lord on earth made possi-

ble, also, the perfect communion. The night before

He died, at the Last Supper, He gave Himself to His

chosen Apostles. In comparison with this, all previ-

ous communions are dwarfed, for the Apostles re-

ceived not merely a sign of grace but the Author

of grace Himself. They took part in a ceremony

which not merely symbolized union with God but



48 THE APPEAL TO REASON

which in an extraordinary manner was union with

God.

As we contemplate our Lord’s return to heaven,

leaving His followers behind, we cannot but ask if

these marvelous privileges had all come to an end?

Were all men, from that moment on, to know of

God’s presence on earth merely as an incident of

history? Were they never again to have God in their

midst as an object of worship, or to offer Him as the

victim of sacrifice, or to receive Him in communion?

Had God lifted the human race for a brief moment

of exalted intimacy, only to drop it back again for-

ever? Was the clock of God’s providence to be turned

backwards? Were men to be thrown back again on

their own human devices, for the worship of God,

for sacrifices to Him, and for communion? Does it

seem reasonable?

The questions are suggested by my general sub-

ject, “The Appeal to Reason.” And I submit that in

the third and final period of God’s relationship with

man it is only reasonable that the move should be

forward, rather than backward, and that men should

be drawn closer to God, rather than pushed away.

In coming to this conclusion, as we reasonably

do, we are halted for a moment to reflect that per-

fection cannot be made more perfect. Our Lord’s

presence on earth could not be made more real than

it was. Neither could His sacrifice on the cross, nor

the communion given to the Apostles. Wherein, then,

is there the possibility of anything beyond or above

these perfections? Not in quality, of course; but in

quantity. There would be a great advance in God’s

plan if the blessings once limited to a few could be

made available to all Christians, everywhere and

always.



THE REAL PRESENCE 49

Reasonably, then, we look to our Lord for such

a plan. We look to Him for a method whereby He
can do for us today what He did for the few who

knelt before Him nineteen centuries ago, who stood

at the foot of the cross, and who received Him in

communion at the Last Supper. Our reasoning thus

brings us to the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

It is the Sacrament that contains the body and

blood, soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ,

under the appearance of bread and wine. It has its

origin in the mind and will of our Lord, as expressed

at the Last Supper. There, surrounded by His Apos-

tles, He took bread in His hands, broke and blessed

it, giving thanks, and then pronounced these start-

ling words: “Take ye, and eat. This is my body.”

In similar manner, likewise, He took wine, and bless-

ing it, said: “Drink ye all of this. For this is my

blocd. . .” And then He added: “Do this for a com-

memoration of me.”

Stated thus in a few brief sentences, are the

events which have changed the whole course of re-

ligious history. The facts are learned from two

sources, oral tradition and the written records. The

former was quickly transformed into Christian life

and customs which, from the very beginning, cen-

tered in and around the Eucharist.

The written records, four of them, are found in

the New Testament; written respectively by St.

Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. Paul. Two

of these are from eye witnesses. St. Matthew, an

Apostle, was present at the Last Supper. St. Mark,

the companion and scribe of St. Peter, wrote what

the latter preached
;
and St. Peter, also, was present

at the Last Supper. The other two, not being there,



50 THE APPEAL TO REASON

wrote what they learned from the Christian com-

munity.

It is noteworthy that all four accounts agree,

agree on the essentials. There is divergence, of

course in the order of details and in emphasis. There

is exactly the type of difference that must be ex-

pected from honest and independent reporters of the

same fact. But all agree that our Lord said, 'This

is my body,” and ‘This is my blood.”

Our Lord's meaning is indicated not merely by

His own words and by the circumstances, but also

by the way He was understood by His contemporar-

ies. It appears that all who knew Him—there is no
evidence of an exception—understood Him to mean
exactly what I have stated. In confirmation, I call

attention to two events, one that occurred a few

months before the Last Supper, and one that oc-

curred a few years after.

You recall from your Bible the occasion when

our Lord fed the thousands of persons by multiply-

ing a few loaves and fishes. Shortly thereafter, per-

haps because the miracle was a fitting introduction,

He declared His intention of giving His body as food

for His followers, insisting that they must partake

of that food. The pronouncement, as you anticipate,

was received with protest from some of the bystand-

ers. How, they asked, how could He possibly give

His flesh as food?

The response is significant. If He had been mis-

understood, it would have been easy to say so. In-

stead, however, He only emphasized what He had

said before. Once more there was a protest, this

time from some of His disciples. “This saying is

hard,” they insisted, “and who can hear it.” It was

a “hard saying,” if our Lord really meant it. Once



THE REAL PRESENCE 51

more He had the opportunity to explain. Once more,

however, He reasserted the same “hard saying.”

And then, according to the inspired writer, St. John

the Apostle, some of His disciples left Him and

waiked no more with Him. Without a word He let

them go. Evidently, they had understood Him cor-

rectly.

The second event is a letter written by St. Paul

to the Corinthians, sometime within twenty-five

years after the Last Supper. It is valuable in show
T
-

ing what the early Christians thought about the

Eucharist. In the words which I shall quote, St.

Paul is not teaching something new; rather, he is

referring to a truth which his readers already be-

lieved. It seems that some of the Corinthians, con-

verts as they were from paganism, occasionally

slipped back again to their former temples and re-

ceived communion there. To impress upon them the

gravity of their offense, St. Paul reminds them of

what their Christian communion really is.

I now quote : “The chalice of benediction, which

we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of

Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not

the partaking of the body of the Lord? . . . You can-

not be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of

the table of devils.” “Therefore whosoever shall eat

this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un-

worthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood

of the Lord.” Without any comment, because com-

ment is scarcely necessary, I submit that the early

Christians in Corinth believed, having been so taught

—and their teaching goes back still closer to the
time of Christ—that at the Last Supper He meant
to say that He was really present under the appear-

ance of bread and wine.



52 THE APPEAL TO REASON

The question arises as to how the Last Supper

is carried over into the daily practice of the Church.

You recall the words of our Lord, “Do this for a com-

memoration of me.” Therein He commanded His

Apostles, and through them all later priests, to do

what He had done. Thus it is that in each Mass said

throughout the world, the Last Supper is reenacted.

As the priest pronounces the words, “This is my

body” and “This is my blood,” the miracle of tran-

substantiation takes place, exactly as it did when our

Lord Himself first uttered them. And He comes

present on each altar today as truly as He was

present nineteen centuries ago.

In the Eucharist He is thus before His people

as an object of worship. He is in the tabernacle of

each Catholic church. You can enter at any time and

worship Him
;
and you will be conscious of His pres-

ence.

The Eucharsit makes possible the preservation

of the Sacrifice which was offered on Mt. Calvary.

Our Lord can be and is offered daily on the altar of

each church, as the victim of sacrifice, offered at

the hands of the priest appointed for the purpose.

And thus we have the Mass. And thus it is possible

for Christians, throughout the world at all times, to

join in the experience of those few who stood at the

foot of the cross.

The Eucharist makes it possible, also, for Chris-

tians everywhere to receive the same communion

which the Apostles received. They may claim for

themselves that very experience and blessing. What

was once a peculiar privilege for twelve men has

thus become the daily privilege of millions. It has

been so for nineteen centuries of the past; it will

remain so for countless more centuries of the future.



THE REAL PRESENCE 53

The criticism of the doctrine today is the same

as when our Lord first declared it. There is no satis-

factory explanation, so it is said. Let me make it

clear that even if I had unlimited time at my dis-

posal, instead of a few moments, I would not and

could not attempt a complete explanation of tran-

substantiation. In certain respects it is a mystery,

and will always remain so. But that fact, my friends,

is no sufficient reason for rejecting it. We believe
many things in the natural order which cannot be

explained; that electricity produces light, for in-

stance; also, that ether waves can carry the human

voice across the continent. No one can explain how

a plant converts inanimate matter into living leaf

and blossom. We accept such phenomena, although
we cannot understand them, because of the evidence.

Why not take the same reasonable attitude toward

transubstantiation ? Although it cannot be fully un-

derstood, it is supported by excellent evidence, the

testimony of our divine Lord Himself.

It is often contended, however, that a change

from one substance to another is impossible. I ask

how anyone can make such a statement. Every

moment of our lives we demonstrate that changes of

substance take place. For example, the substance of

bread, when consumed as food, through some mys-

terious process is changed into the substance of the

human body. If this can be done by nature, within

a few hours of time, why can it not be done by the

Author of nature, without the lapse of time? Let it

not be forgotten that God is above the laws of na-

ture
;
certainly He is not limited by His own creation.

Concerning the substance of matter, from which

the criticisms arise, even the scientific world knows

very little. Theories generally accepted by one gen-



54 THE APPEAL TO REASON

eration are often discarded by the next. For ex-

ample, take the so-called laws of the conservation of

matter and energy. Only a few years ago, in 1929

to be exact, Sir James Jeans, whose standing as a

scholar and scientist is unquestioned, went so far as

to say this : “The two fundamental corner-stones of

twentieth century physics, the conservation of mat-

ter and the conservation of energy, are both abol-

ished.” And yet, remember, my friends, many times

these very theories have been appealed to in order to

disprove the doctrine of the Real Presence. No

doubt, some Catholics have lost their faith and many

prospective converts have been driven away, because

of these theories, now abandoned.

Scientists have recently declared that certain

particles of the atom, the unit of matter, travel

through their infinitesmally small space at the amaz-

ing velocity of twelve thousand miles a second. If

this extraordinary statement is true, and perhaps

it is, the scientists of a few years ago knew very

little about the composition of matter; to them, the

idea of such velocity within the atom would have

appeared most ridiculous.

Let us profit from this experience. Let us be

humble enough to recognize that in a few years our

present theories about the substance of matter also

may be discarded. And if we are humble we shall

nor hold up mere human opinion about transubstan-

liation against the clear statements of our Lord.

Rather, we shall imitate the prudence of Cardinal

Newman who, after a lifetime of study, declared:

“What do I know of substance or matter? Just as

much as the greatest philosopher; and that is noth-

ing at all.”

Being intellectually humble, our minds will open



THE REAL PRESENCE 5S

to the truth. Repenting of doubts, we shall do as

St. Thomas did, bow down before the Real Presence

and say, “My Lord and my God.” We shall offer
Him in sacrifice, as He truly comes present on the

altar in the Mass. And we shall receive Him in

communion, preparing our souls and bodies to be in

some small degree worthy of so great a gift from

above.



THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY

Address delivered July 24, 1938.

Among the forms of religion given to man by

Almighty God, none is more important to the wel-

fare of society than the Sacrament of Matrimony.

It is of importance, superlatively so, because it

touches human nature at a point of unusual sensi-

tiveness. In no other respect is the fall of man so

clearly evidenced as the relationship of the sexes.

In no other respect does the human family lose its

ideals so completely. In no other respect does it

require such constant watchfulness and extraordi-

nary protection.

In considering this subject as it appeals to

reason, as I do this afternoon, a major difficulty is

at once disclosed. This is one subject about which

men and women do not like to reason. Instead of

logic, they incline to follow emotions
;
for principles,

they substitute personal preferences. When they

wish to form matrimonial unions which are attrac-

tive but forbidden, they begin to invent excuses of

justification. Historically speaking, out of these for-

bidden unions have often come practices and cus-

toms, thus carrying individual mistakes over into

the very fabric of society.

The characteristic of marriage that absorbs

attention today is its freedom, the freedom of the

contracting parties. But this indicates only a partial

truth
;
it must be carefully defined or it obscures the

whole truth. Without any doubt each man and wom-

an is wholly free to enter or refuse to enter the

marriage state. Marriage is a contract; it is the

meeting of two minds. Being like other contracts



THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY 57

in this respect, it does not exist unless there is

mutual consent. And there is no consent without

freedom. A man or woman who is coerced into a
marriage relationship, whether the coercion is

physical or moral, is not married.

Incidentally, the Catholic Church, with all of

her strictness toward marriage, perhaps I should

say precisely because of her strictness, demands

freedom for the contracting parties. She does not

hesitate to condemn as invalid any so-called mar-

riage wherein freedom is violated, even at the risk

of being misunderstood and criticized.

But is freedom all that is required? One would

think so, to judge from modern commentaries and

modern legislation. It would seem that there is a

conspiracy in our midst to bring about one single

end, the freedom of men and women to enter and to

break marriage relationships as they please, regard-

less of everything else. It is at this point that reason

rebels.

We do not demand such unrestrained freedom
in other matters. Man has the right to own private

property, for instance. He may choose freely to own

or not to own. But it does not follow that he is justi-

fied in taking what belongs to another. His freedom

is limited by law, by the laws of nature and God.

Man has the right of free speech. But it does not

follow that he may speak falsehoods and blasphemy.

Again, his freedom is limited by law. Why should

anyone think that freedom in marriage is different,

that it is above law ?

What I am saying is this : Freedom is one of the

essentials of marriage, but it is not the only essen-

tial. Marriage is far more than an individual con-

tract; for one thing, it is a social relationship.



68 THE APPEAL TO REASON

The unit of society is the home; the beginning

of the home is marriage. Whatever affects mar-

riage, therefore, affects the home and society. When

the ideals of marriage are generally violated, society

tends downward. It can rise again only when respect

for those ideals is restored. For very good reason,

therefore, society must be interested in the purity

of the marriages by which it is vitalized.

The spokesman of society is the State, or the

civil government. Within its proper sphere, it has

the duty of regulating marriage. It does so by re-

quiring publicity, for instance; by requiring cere-

monies in the presence of designated witnesses; by

securing freedom to the parties. It should do so by

carrying over into civil laws the natural and divine

laws governing marriage.

In our country this authority is generally rec-

ognized. Our young people do not attempt to set up

homes without complying with the rules and cere-

monies prescribed by their local governments. For-

tunately, we have not yet fallen into general defi-

ance of those laws. We may come to it, however,
before long

;
it is only one step removed. Already it

is being approached in some of the other countries.

Up to date, however, the right of civil govern-

ment to regulate marriage is recognized by the

American people. The danger is that it is recognized

too much, or rather, let us say too exclusively. The

State is being made the sole authority, outside the

contracting parties themselves, to pass judgment on

marriage. It is as if there were nothing from above,

no laws or principles or ideals above those com-

pounded by the various legislatures.

Is this changed attitude, for it is a change, a

part of the modern mania for State absolutism?



THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY 59

Are the American people unwittingly helping the

cause of the totalitarian civil government? It would

seem so. At least in respect to marriage, they are

actually doing so.

That this attitude is unreasonable should be ob-

vious; and again I appeal to comparisons. Civil

governments regulate the ownership of private

property. They do so on the theory, not that they

themselves- create the right of property, but rather

that they apply the objective principles of justice

according to which their citizens have the right.

Similarly, they forbid murder; not because their

officials have decided that murder is wrong, but

rather because murder is wrong, being forbidden

by nature and by Almighty God. Governments rec-

ognize over them, at least in our country they are

supposed to recognize, certain principles which they

are bound to respect.

Now why should a different theory be applied

to marriage? Why should the American people

think that their civil governments can create the

principles to govern marriage, as distinguished from

the principles to govern everything else? The an-

swer is, of course, that they do not think so. The

present tendency is not the result of thought and

decision; precisely to the contrary, it is the result

of a lack of thought and a lack of decision. It is

merely a surrender to temptation and weakness.

I have called attention to two modern tendencies

concerning marriage: First, the demand for more

and more freedom from regulation; and second, the

inclination to give civil government exclusive regula-

tive power. Does it seem, at first thought, that these

two tendencies are inconsistent one with the other

and that, therefore, they cannot develop simultan-



60 THE APPEAL TO REASON

eously in the same society? The truth is that one is

the sequel to the other.

Civil government cannot be trusted to be the

exclusive or even the principal regulator of mar-

riage. Sooner or later it draws its principles from

the wrong source; sooner or later it compromises

with low standards, with the weakneses of human

nature. Particularly is this true of a popular gov-

ernment, where the people are in control. So it is

that to the degree that civil government monopolizes

the function of regulating marriage precisely to

that same degree does marriage tend to fly away

from regulation. And that means unreasonable

freedom for the individual; freedom from external

restraints
;
freedom to yield to any impulse, regard-

less of morality.

Whenever civil government steps outside its

own proper sphere, attempting to take the place of

nature and of God, it upsets the whole scheme of

things. Undertaking to do too much, eventually it

does too little. Claiming an authority which God

does not intend it to have, it loses the exercise of

the authority which God gave it. It becomes merely

a barometer of popular standards, a mere register

of social diseases, rather than a leader in morality

and a promoter of justice. Theoretically it continues

to regulate; actually it permits, under the name of

law, anything that the people wish to do.

In summary to this point, I have said first that

marriage is an individual and freely formed con-

tract, and second that it is a social relationship. To

be properly understood, however, marriage must be

viewed on a still higher plane, the plane of religion.

It is free, of course ; it is social, obviously. But above



THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY 61

either of these designations is its dignity as an act of

religion.

If marriage is important to the welfare of so-

ciety, it is equally important to the preservation of

the human race. It forms the beginning of the

home wherein are reared not merely citizens of the

State but children of God. In the home the parents

cooperate with God, being procreators of the human

family. God has every right, therefore, to be con-

cerned about the homes in which His plan for per-

petuating the race is carried out.

As the civil government is the spokesman of

society, so the Church is the spokesman of God. As

civil government brings to marriage the regulations

demanded by society, so the Church brings to mar-

riage the regulations demanded by Almighty God.

It is true, of course, that society draws its authority

from God no less than does the Church, although

in a different way. Civil government, furthermore,

should cooperate with the Church in applying to

marriage, to everything else for that matter, the

laws of God. But since marriage is a part of the

program explicitly entrusted to the Church by our

divine Lord, the Church is authorized in a very spe-

cial sense to protect God’s interest in it.

The elementary laws governing marriage come

from nature and from God. That marriage is the

union of one man and one woman is written clearly

in nature itself. No matter from what starting point

the approach is made, biological, economic, educa-

tional, cultural, or sentimental, the same conclusion

is reached
;
namely, the endorsement of monogamy.

Nature condemns, also, the remarriage of sepa-

rated persons. Since the primary purpose of mar-

riage is the procreation and education of children.



62 THE APPEAL TO REASON

and since for the ideal attainment of this purpose

an unbroken home is necessary, it follows that di-

vorce is condemned.

So important is it that these principles be clear-

ly understood that our divine Lord Himself stated

them. Knowing the weakness of men and women, He

knew that they needed more than the unwritten

laws of nature to keep them close to the narrow path.

And so He spoke openly to His followers about the

nature of marriage, defining its unity and indissolu-

bility.

More than that, again because He knew human

nature, He understood how much men and women

need supernatural help in order to obey laws. To

that end He placed in His religion certain means

of grace, acts of worship, whereby this help may be

obtained. He even elevated matrimony itself to the

dignity of a Sacrament. It is thus more than a con-

tract; it is the means of calling upon God and re-

ceiving from Him the blessings and help which

husband and wife need.

It is this religious character of marriage that

is now so generally overlooked. One evidence of this,

one among others, is the increasing willingness of

young people to be married by civil officials, rather

than by the ministers and clergymen of their re-

ligious organizations. This marks a decline from

the religious plane to the mere social plane; and

because there is no logical stopping there, it is pro-

phetic of a still further decline.

The religious regulation of marriage, in con-

trast with mere social and political regulation, is

true and uncompromising. The Church draws her

principles from above, not from below, from God,

not from man. She asserts and defends those prin-



THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY 63

ciples, regardless of what the whole world may

think. She may be condemned
;
she may suffer

;
she

may lose many of her own people. Even so, she does

hot compromise the principles of marriage. In nine-

teen centuries she has not compromised
;
in nineteen

centuries more she will not compromise.

Very often the point of view of the Church is

misunderstood by non-Catholics, a fact which I am

quick to recognize, because I myself was once a

Protestant. And the legislation of the Church con-

cerning matrimony, being misunderstood, is often

criticized. Let me assure you that what the Church

is trying to do is to make this a better society for

you to live in, and a safer society for your children

to grow up in.

She declares, with all of the power at her com-

mand, that the principles which govern matrimony

have been given to the world by God Himself, and

that they bind men and women in conscience. She

declares that these principles are immutable, that

they cannot be changed either by civil governments

or by private persons. She declares that to her was

entrusted the guardianship of the principles as well

as the Sacrament of Matrimony, which fact she is

ready to prove. And she declares that it is in ful-

fillment of this divine trust that she makes neces-

sary rules and regulations, which must be obeyed

by her children.

Among these laws is that which requires Cath-

olics, if and when they contract marriage, to do So

in the presence of an authorized priest. He is identi-

fied, both by calling and position, with their religion.

It is he who ministers to their spiritual needs. He

baptizes them as infants, hears their confessions,

says Mass for them, preaches to them, buries their



64 THE APPEAL TO REASON

dead, gives them communion, and is their leader in

all matters of religion. It is to this same official that

they must go for their marriages. I speak of this

law because it shows the mind of the Church; it is

one means, and it is typical of the others, by which

the Church tries to accomplish her high purpose.

Marriages must be brought back and preserved

as acts of religion. They must be surrounded by

religious influences. The principles by which they

are governed must be sought from God; also, the

help by which these principles are to be obeyed is to

be sought from God. And man’s contact with God is

through religion. There is no other way.

In her crusade to protect the sacredness of mar-

riage, the Church deserves your support, my friends,

and I speak to Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

She will succeed if you and other high minded per-

sons will reasonably cooperate wtih her.



CARDINAL HAYES STATES PURPOSE

OF CATHOLIC HOUR

(Extract from his address at the inaugural program in th

studio of the National Broadcasting Company, New York
City, March 2, 1930.^)

Our congratulations and our gratitude are extended to the

National Council of Catholic Men and its officials, and to all

who, by their financial support, have made it possible to use

this offer of the National Broadcasting Company. The heavy

expense of managing and financing a weekly program, its

musical numbers, its speakers, the subsequent answering of

inquiries, must be met. . . .

This radio hour is for all the people of the United States.

To our fellow-citizens, in this word of dedication, we wish to

express a cordial greeting and, indeed, congratulations. For

this radio hour is one of service to America, which certainly

will listen in interestedly, and even sympathetically, I am
sure, to the voice of the ancient Church with its historic

background of all the centuries of the Christian era, and

with its own notable contribution to the discovery, explora-

tion, foundation and growth of our glorious country. . . .

Thus to voice before a vast public the Catholic Church is

no light task. Our prayers will be with those who have that

task in hand. We feel certain that it will have both the
good will and the good wishes of the great majority of our

countrymen. Surely, there is no true lover of our Country

who does not eagerly hope for a less worldly, a less material,

and a more spiritual standard among our people.

With good will, with kindness and with Christ-like sympa-

thy for all, this work is inaugurated. So may it continue.

So may it be fulfilled. This word of dedication voices, there-

fore, the hope that this radio hour may serve to make known,

to explain with the charity of Christ, our faith, which we

love even as we love Christ Himself. May it serve to make
better understood that faith as it really is—a light revealing
the pathway to heaven: a strength, and a power divine

through Christ; pardoning our sins, elevating, consecrating

our common every-day duties and joys, bringing not only

justice but gladness and peace to our searching and ques-

tioning hearts.



94 CATHOLIC HOUR STATIONS

In 41 States, the District of Columbia, and Hawaii

WBRC, 980 kc
Mobile WALA, 1380 kc

Arizona Phoenix KTAR, 620 kc
Tucson KVOA, 1260 kc

KARK, 890 kc
California Bakersfield KERN, 1370 kc

Fresno KMJ, 580 kc
Los Angeles KECA, 1430 kc
Sacramento KFBK, 1490 kc
San Francisco KPO, 680 kc
Stockton KWG, 1200 kc
Denver KOA, 830 kc
Pueblo KGHF, 1320 kc
Hartford WTIC, 1040 kc

WRC, 950 kc
Florida Jacksonville WJAX, 900 kc

Lakeland WLAK, 1310 kc
Miami WIOD, 610 kc
Pensacola WCOA, 1340 kc
Tampa ... WFLA-WSUN, 620 kc
Atlanta WSB, 740 kc
Boise KIDO, 1350 kc
Pocatello KSEI, 900 kc

Chicago .. WMAQ-WCFL, 670 kc
Evansville WGBF, 630 kc
Fort Wayne WGL, 1370 kc
Indianapolis WIRE, 1400 kc
Terre Haute WBOW, 1310 kc

K&ns'fls
Wichita KANS, 1210 kc

Kentucky Louisville WAVE, 940 kc

Louisiana New Orleans WSMB, 1320 kc
Shreveport KTBS, 1450 kc

Maine Portland WCSH, 940 kc

Maryland Baltimore WFBR, 1270 kc

Massachusetts Boston WBZ, 990 kc
Springfield WBZA, 990 kc

Michigan Detroit WWJ, 850 kc
Minnesota Duluth-Superior WEBC, 1290 kc

Mankato KYSM, 1500 kc
Minneapolis-St. Paul ... KSTP, 1460 kc
St. Cloud KFAM, 1420 kc

Mississippi Jackson WJDX, 1270 kc
Missouri Kansas City WDAF, 610 kc

Springfield KGBX, 1230 kc
Saint Louis KSD, 550 kc

Montana Billings KOHT,. 780 kc
Butte KGHt, 1340 kc
Helena KPFA, 1210 kc

Nebraska Omaha WOW, 590 kc
Nevada Reno KOH, 1380 kc
New Mexico Albuquerque KOB, 1180 kc
New York Buffalo WBEN, 900 kc

New York WEAF, 660 kc
Schenectady WGY, 790 kc

North Carolina Asheville WISE, 1370 kc
Charlotte WSOC, 1210 kc
Raleigh WPTF, 680 kc

North Dakota Bismarck KFYR, 550 kc
Fargo WDAY, 940 kc

Ohio Cincinnati WSAI, 1330 kc
Cleveland WTAM, 1070 kc
Columbus WCOL, 1210 kc

Oklahoma Oklahoma City WKY, 900 kc
Tulsa KVOO, 1140 kc

Oregon Medford KMED, 1410 kc
Portland KEX, 1180 kc



94 CATHOLIC HOUR STATIONS
In 41

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island
South Carolina

South Dakota
Tennessee

Texas

Utah
Virginia

Washington

Wisconsin

HAWAII
SHORT WAVE

States, the District of Colombia, and Hawaii

Allentown WSAN, 1440 kc
Altoona WFBG, 1310 kc
Erie WLEU, 1420 kc
Johnstown WJAC, 1310 kc
Philadelphia KYW, 1020 kc
Pittsburgh WCAE, 1220 kc
Providence . WJAR, 890 kc
Charleston WTMA, 1210 kc
Columbia WIS, 660 kc
Florence WOLS, 1200 kc
Greenville WFBC, 1300 kc
Sioux Falls KSOO-KELO, 1110-1200 kc
Chattanooga WAPO, 1420 kc
Nashville WSM, 650 kc
Amarillo KGNC, 1410 kc
Beaumont KFDM, 660 kc
El Paso KTSM, 1310 kc
Fort Worth KGKO, 570 kc
Houston KPRC, 920 kc
San Antonio WOAI, 1190 kc
Salt Lake City KDYL, 1290 kc
Norfolk WTAR, 780 kc
Richmond WMBG, 1350 kc
Seattle KOMO, 920 kc
Spokane KHQ, 590 kc
Madison WIBA, 1280 kc
Honolulu KGU, 750 kc
Schenectady, N. Y WGEO, 9.53 meg

(Revised as of January 6, 1940)



CATHOLIC HOUR RADIO ADDRESSES IN
PAMPHLET FORM

OUR SUNDAY VISITOR is the authorized publisher of all CATHOLIC
HOUR' addresses in pamphlet form. The addresses published to date, all of
which are available, are listed below. Others will be published as they are

delivered.

Quantity Prices Do Not Include Carriage Charge

“The Divine Romance,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 80 pages

and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 more, 10c each. In quantities,

$8.00 per 100.

“The Moral Order” and “Mary, the Mother of Jesus,” by Rev. Dr. Geo.

Johnson, 64 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each.

In quantities, $6.00 per 100.

“A Trilogy on Prayer,” by Rev. Thomas F. Burke, C.S.P., 32 pages
and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities,

$5.00 per 100.

“The Philosophy of Catholic Education,” by Rev. Dr. Charles L.
O’Donnell. C.S.C., 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or

more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Christianity and the Modern Mind,” by Rev. John A. McClorey, S.J.,

64 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In

quantities, $6.00 per 100.

“The Moral Law,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 88 pages and
cover. Single copy, 20c; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities, $9.50 per 100.

“Christ and His Church,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Joseph M. Corrigan, 88
pages and cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c each. In

quantities, $9.50 per 100.

“The Marks of the Church,” by Rev. Dr. John K. Cartwright, 48 pages

and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each. In quantities,

$5.50 per 100.

“The Organization and Government of the Church,” by Rev. Dr. Fran-

cis J. Connell, C.SS.R., 48 pages- and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5

or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Moral Factors in Economic Life,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Francis J. Haas

and Rt. Rev. Msgr. John A. Ryan, 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c
postpaid

;
5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Divine Helps for Man,” by Rev. Dr. Edward J. Walsh, C.M., 104
pages and cover. Single copy, 25c postpaid ; 5 or more, 20c each. In
quantities, $11.00 per 100.

“The Parables,” by Rev. John A. McClorey, S.J., 128 pages and cover.
Single copy, 30c postpaid ; 5 or more, 20c each. In quantities, $12.00 per

100 .

“Christianity’s Contribution to Civilization,” by Rev. James M. Gillis,
C.S.P., 96 pages and cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c
each. In quantities, $10.00 per 100.

“Manifestations of Christ,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 123

pages and cover. Single copy, 30c postpaid ; 5 or more, 20c each. In
quantities, $12.00 per 100.

“The Way of the Cross,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 32 pages
and cover (prayer book size). Single copy, 10c postpaid; 5 or more, 5c
each. In quantities, $3.00 per 100.

“Christ Today,” by Very Rev. Dr. Ignatius' Smith, O.P., 48 pages and
cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50
per 100.

“The Christian Family,” by Rev. Dr. Edward Lodge Curran, 68 pages
and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid; 5 or more, 10c each. In quantities,
$7.00 per 100.

“The Dublin Eucharistic Congress,” by His Eminence William Car-
dinal O’Connell. An address rebroadcast from Dublin, 12 pages and cover.
Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 5c each. In quantities, $3.75 per 100.

“Rural Catholic Action,” by Rev. Dr. Edgar Schmiedeler, O.S.B., 24
pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 5c each. In quan-
tities, $3.50 per 100.

“Religion and Human Nature,” by Rev. Dr. Joseph A. Daly, 40 pages
and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities,
$5.50 per 100.

“The Church and Some Outstanding Problems of the Day,” by Rev.
Jones I. Corrigan, S.J., 72 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid

;

5 or more, 10c each. In quantities, $8.00 per 100.



“Conflicting Standards,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 80 pages

and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each. In quantities,

$8.00 per 100.

“The Hymn of the Conquered,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen,
128 pages and cover. Single copy, 30c postpaid ; 5 or more, 20c each. In

quantities, $12.00 per 100.

“The Seven Last Words,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, (prayer

book size) 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 5c

each. In quantities, $3.00 per 100.

“The Church and the Child,” by Rev. Dr. Paul H. Furfey, 48 pages

and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities,

$5.50 per 100.

“Love’s Veiled Victory and Love’s Laws,” by Rev. Dr. George F.

Strohaver, S.J., 48 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more

8c each. In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Religion and Liturgy,” by Rev. Dr. Francis' A. Walsh, O.S.B., 32 pages

and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities’,

$5.00 per 100.

“The Lord’s Prayer Today,” by Very Rev. Dr. Ignatius Smith, O.P., 64

pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities, $6.00 per 100.

“God, Man and Redemption,” by Rev. Dr. Ignatius W. Cox, S.J., 64
pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities, $6.00 per 100.

“This Mysterious Human Nature,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P.
48 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In
quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“The Eternal Galilean,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 160 pages
and cover. Single copy, 35c postpaid ; 5 or more, 25c each. In quantities,

$16.00 per 100.

“The Queen of Seven Swords,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen
(prayer-book size), 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid; 5 or

more, 5c each. In quantities, $3.00 per 100.

“The Catholic Teaching on Our Industrial System,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr.

John A. Ryan, 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more,

8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“The Happiness of Faith,” by Rev. Daniel A. Lord, S.J., 80 pages and

cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c. In quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“The Salvation of Human Society,” by Rev. Peter J. Bergen, C.S.P., 48
pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities. $5.50 per 100.

“Catholic Education,” by Rev. Dr. George Johnson, 40 pages and
cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50

per 100.

“The Church and Her Missions,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. William Quinn, 32
pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In
quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“The Church and the Depression,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P.

,

80 pages and cover. Single copy. 15c postpaid; 5 or more, 10c each. In
quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“The Fullness of Christ,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 176
pages and cover. Single copy, 45c postpaid ; 5 or more, 30c each. In
quantities, $16.50 per 100.

“The Church and Modern Thought,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P.,
80 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid

; 5 or more, 10c each. In
quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“Misunderstood Truths,”- by Most Rev. Duane G. Hunt, 48 pages and
cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities,
$5.50 per 100.

“The Judgment of God and The Sense of Duty,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr.
William J. Kerby, 16 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid

; 5 or
more, 5c each. In quantities, $3.50 per 100.

“Christian Education,” by Rev. Dr. James A. Reeves, 32 pages and
cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid

; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities. $3.50
per 100.

“What Civilization Owes to the Church,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. William
Quinn, 64 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each.
In quantities, $6.00 per 100.

“If Not Christianity: What?” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 96
pages and cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid; 5 or more, 15c each. In
quantities, $10.00 per 100.



“The Prodigal World,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 140 pages

and cover. Single copy, 35c postpaid ; 5 or more, 25c? each. In quantities,

$16.00 per 100.

“The Coin of Our Tribute,” by Very Rev. Thomas F. Conlon, O.P.,

40 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In

quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Pope Pius XI,” by His Eminence Patrick Cardinal Hayes. An address
in honor of the 79th birthday of His Holiness-, 16 pages and 4 color cover.

Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Misunderstanding the Church,” by Most Rev. Duane G. Hunt, 48
pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities, $5.50 per 100.

“The Poetry of Duty,” by Rev. Alfred Duffy, C.P., 48 pages and cover.

Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Characteristic Christian Ideals,” by Rev. Bonaventure McIntyre, O.
F.M., 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each.
In quantities-, $5.50 per 100.

“The Catholic Church and Youth,” by Rev. John F. O’Hara, C.S.C.,
48 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In
quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“The Spirit of the Missions,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Thomas J. McDonnell,
32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In
quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“The Life of the Soul,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 96 pages and
cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities, $10.00

per 100.

“Our Wounded World,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 112 pages,
and cover. Single copy, 25c postpaid ; 5 or more, 20c each. In quantities,
$11.50 per 100.

The first six addresses in this series published separately under
the title “Freedom and Democracy: a Study of Their Enemies,”
56 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each.
In quantities, $6.00 per 100.

“The Banquet of Triumph,” by Very Rev. J. J. McLarney, O.P., 32
pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-
tities, $5.00 per 100.

“Society and the Social Encyclicals—America’s Road Out,” by Rev.
R. A. McGowan, 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more,
8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Pius XI, Father and Teacher of the Nations” (On His Eightieth
Birthday) by His Excellency, Most Reverend Amleto Giovanni Cicognani,

16 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 5c each. In
quantities, $3.00 per 100.

“The Eastern Catholic Church,” by Rev. John Kallok, 48 pages and
cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50

per 100.

“Joy In Religion,” by Rev. John B. Delauney, C.S.C., 40 pages and

cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50

per 100.

“The ‘Lost’ Radiance of the Religion of Jesus,” by Rev. Thomas A.
Carney, 40 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each.
In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“Some Spiritual Problems of College Students,” by Rev. Dr. Maurice
S. Sheehy, 40 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c
each. In quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“God and Governments,” by Rev. Wilfrid Parsons-, S.J., 48 pages and
cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.50

per 100.

“Saints vs. Kings,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 96 pages and
cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities, $10.00

per 100.

“Justice and Charity,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen.

Part I
—
“The Social Problem and the Church.” 96 pages and cover.
Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c each. In quan-

tities, $11.00 per 100.

Part II
—
“The Individual Problem and the Cross,” 80 pages and

cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each.

In quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“In Defense of Chastity,” by Rev. Felix M. Kirsch, O.M.Cap., 72 pages

and cover, including study aids and bibliography. Single copy 15c postpaid ;
5 or more, 10c each. In quantities, $8.00 per 100.



“The Appeal To Reason,” by Most Rev. Duane G. Hunt, D.D., LL.D.,
72 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each. In
quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“Practical Aspects of Catholic Education,” by Very Rev. Edward V.
Stanford, O.S.A., 48 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more,
8c each ; in quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“The Mission of Youth in Contemporary Society,” by Rev. Dr. George
Johnson, 40 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c
each ; in quantities, $5.50 per 100.

“The Holy Eucharist,” by Most Rev. Joseph F. Rummel, S.T.D., LL.
D., 32 pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each.
In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Cardinal Hayes—A Eulogy,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 16
pages and cover. Single copy, 15c, postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each. In quan-
tities, $5.00 per 100.

“The Rosary and the Rights of Man,” by Very Rev. J. J. McLamey,
O.P., 56 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid; 5 or more, 8c each.
In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Human Life,” by Rev. James M. Gillis, C.S.P., 96 pages and cover.
Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities, $10 per 100.

“Pius XI—A Eulogy,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 24 pages
and cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities.

$6.00 per hundred.

“Freedom,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen.

Part I
—

“Social Freedom.” 80 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c
postpaid

; 5 or more, 10c each. In quantities, $8.00 per

100 .

Part II
—

“Personal Freedom.” 96 pages and cover. Single copy,

20c postpaid; 5 or more, 15c each. In quantities, $11.00

per 100.

“The Holy Ghost,” by Very Rev. J. J. McLarney, O.P., S.T.D., 56

pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more 8c each. In quan-
tities $5.00 per 100.

“Towards the Reconstruction of a Christian Social Order,” by Rev.
Dr. John P. Monaghan. Ph.D., 48 pages and cover. Single copy, 15c
postpaid

; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“Marian Vignettes,” by Rev. J. R. Keane, O.S.M., 32 pages and cover.
Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities, $5.00 per 100.

“The Peace of Christ,” by Very Rev. Martin J. O’Malley, C.M. 32
pages and cover. Single copy, 10c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities, $5.00 per 100.

“God’s World of Tomorrow,” by Rev. John J. Russell, D.D., 40 pages
and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quantities,

$5.50 per 100.

“The Catholic Tradition In Literature,” by Brother Leo. F.S.C., 40
pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-
tities, $5.50 per 100.

“What Catholics Do At Mass,” by Rev. Dr. William H. Russell, 72
pages and cover, including study club questions and suggestions, and brief

bibliography. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 10c each. In quantities,

$8.00 per 100.

“Prophets and Kings : Great Scenes, Great Lines,” by Rev. James M.

Gillis, C.S.P., 96 pages and cover. Single copy, 20c postpaid ; 5 or more,

15c each. In quantities, $10.00 per 100.

“Peace, the Fruit of Justice,” by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, 64

pages and cover. Single copy, 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In quan-

tities, $6.00 per 100.

“The Seven Last Words and The Seven Virtues” by Rt. Rev. Msgr.

Fulton J. Sheen, 80 pages and cover. Single copies 15c postpaid ; 5 or more,

10c each. In quantities, $8.00 per 100.

“1930—Memories—1940”—The addresses delivered in the Tenth Anni-
versary Broadcast of the Catholic Hour on March 3, 1940, together with

congratulatory messages and editorials. 80 pages and cover. Single copy,

25c postpaid : 5 or more, 20c each. In quantities, $10.00 per hundred.

“What Kind of a World Do You Want,” by Rev. Wilfrid Parsons. S.J..

40 pages and cover. Single copies 15c postpaid ; 5 or more, 8c each. In

quantities, $5.50 per 100.

Complete list of 89 pamphlets to one address in U. S.. $10.25, postpaid.

Price to Canada and Foreign Countries, $13.00.

Address: OUR SUNDAY VISITOR, Huntington, Indiana