IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V // 1^ 'M.%^ / 'V^ "V . "^^ #. ^^ 4K/. I/. 1.0 I.I 1.25 1^ 128 1 2.5 |50 ■^" HHK ^ IIIM .8 U IIIIII.6 V] : > s>^ .V O / • ■^^ w %" A CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques Th po The Institute has attempted to obtain the best L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire of fil original copy available for filming. Physical qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains features of this copy which may alter any of the ddfauts susceptibles de nuire it la quality de la images in the reproduction are checked below. reproduction sont not6s ci-dessous. Th y Coloured covers/ D Coloured pages/ CO or Couvertures de couleur Pages de couleur ap Coloured maps/ Coloured plates/ Th fil Cartes gdographiques en couleur Planches en couleur im \7\ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Show through/ Pages d^colordes, tachetdes ou piqu6es Transparence M in Tight binding (may cause shadows or up bo distortion along interior margin)/ l^ Pages damaged/ fo Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou Pages endommagdes de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure) Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires ' Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibi ographiques Only edition available/ — Pagination incorrect/ Seule Edition disponible Erreurs de pagination Bound with other material/ D Pages missing/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Des pages manquent Cover title missing/ — Maps missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Des cartes g6ographiques manquent PIfjtes missing/ Des planches manquent Additional comments/ Commentaires suppldmentaires 1 The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ► (meaning CONTINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "EN3"), whichever applies. Les images suivantes ont At4 reproduites avec le plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de I'exemplaire film*, et en conformit6 avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la der- nidre image de cheque microifiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbole V signifie "FIN". The original copy was borrowed from, and filmed with, the kind consent of the following institution: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce A la g6n6rosit6 de I'^tablissement prAteur suivant : Bibliothdque nationale du Canada Maps or plates too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper Inft hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre reproduites en un seul clichd sont filmies A partir de Tangle sup6rieure gauche, de gauche d droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n6cessaire. Le diagramme suivant illustre la m^thode : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 6 6 'I f ■' -tV' i» I f II . ] r > ) J ti t .■« r t i^j; , i/^ « / J J R h l/^t^' r^ >rw-r'V^- I THE JESUITS. TO THE REV J. J. ROY, B. A., of \Vinnipeg, BT THE REV. LEWIS DRUMMOND, S. J. DELIVERED AT St. Patrick's Ithurch, HJttauia, Jflonbay, JFlarch 25th, 1889. From a Verbatim (Report by Mr. J, Mullin, I / ^^^ OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. The seating capacity of St. Patrick's church was taxed to its utmost last night by the immense congregation, composed entirely of men, who gathered to hear the Key. Father Drummond's reply to the pamphlet written by Rev. J. J. Roy, of Winnipeg, attacking the Jesuit order. The congregation did not consist altogether of Roman Catholics, for many Protestants, whose interest has been aroused by the Jesuit mission, attended to hear the eloquent preacher. — Ottawa Free Press, Tuesday, March 26tb, 1889. Father Drammond spoke for nearly three hours in St. Patrick's church last night. His remarks were intended as a reply to Rev. J. J. Roy, of Winnipeg, author of the pamphlet, " The Jesuit Order, or an In- fieJlible' Pope, who being dead, yet speaketh," about the Jesuits. Father Drummond utter id a great many good tRings, and besides finding time to defend his order in a brilliant manner, took the opportunity, figuratively speaking, of " demolishing" both Kev. Mr. Roy and Prof. Goldwin Smith. The service in connection with the mission was for men only, and the church was filled. Father Drummond scores his points well. There is a certain amount of gravity in his humor totally in harmony with the surroundings. — Evening Journal, Ottawa, March 26th, 1889. >■' THE JESUITS. ; My Dear Friends : — I am not going lo preach a sermon ; I am simply going to repel an attack made against the Jesuit Order and against my- self in particular, and to reply to some of the principal points of the at- tack. It will be impossible for me to go through them all, as time will not allow it ; but I shall deal with the most important of them. A few days ago there appeared in many part? of this city hand-bills advertising a lecture by the Rev. J. J. Roy. One of these sheets reads thus, " The Jesuit Order, or an infalUble Pope, who ' being dead, speaketh ' about the Jesuits.'" This very title is frtbricated on what is called the top-knot comedown principle of intei-preting Scripture. In the early part of this century it was the fashion in England^ not very dissimilar to a fashion that exists in our own day, for ladies to wear top-knots on their foreheads. A certain Anglican clergyman could not bear the sight of those top-knots ; he determined to find a text which should destroy them, and sure enough he one day rose in the pulpit and gave out as his text "Top-knot come down' Matthew 24 th chap. 17th verse. The people, who all had their New Testament, looked up the chapter and found the passage "Let him who is on the house-top not come down." The title of this advertisement is got up on the top-knot come down principle — "An infallible Pope who being dead, speaketh about the Jesuits ; " the only words taken from the Scripture are " being dead, speaketh." — "A reply by the Rev. J. J. Roy B. A. to Father Drummond of the Jesuit Order at St. Boniface College, Manitoba." Then follow the contents, "For sale at every book store, price 15 cents." Next comes a quotation from the Winnipeg Sun of March 11, 1889 : ' "St. George's Chu-ch was packed to the doors, windows and ante-rooms, last night -by an eagei audience, to hear the Rev. J. J. Roy preach a sermon on the Jesuit question, and before the hour at which service begins crowds were turned away, unable even to secure a place to listen i?! the porches. The sermon was a very inte- resting and deep refutation of Father Drummond's letter to the Fret Press, with the Pope's brief." I am very glad indeed to hear he had such an adience, because I know that on the last of a series of sermons he gave last summer, a gentleman wha was in a house close to the church, counted the number of people who came out, and there were just twenty-three. So I have reason to suppose that it was probably the subject that drew the people there. If you want to get a crowd anywhere, you have only to announce that you are going to blackguard the Jesuits. Then comes another advertisement, << A Dialogue on the Jesuit Question between a Clergyman and a Pai'isliioner.^' *• Pakishio?jer. — What is your opinion, Reverend Sir, of the Jesuit Question, which 18 now occupying so much public attention ? Clkrgyman. — An episode of the "French Question." P.— And what is the " French Question." ? C. — The question, wiiich is to decide who is to rule in this Dominion ; or the one of the papers, in which he protested against this serm^ Mr. Roy prepared an answer, and went to the editor of the Gai He wished to have this letter published. Mr. Burrowes, the editor of the Call, said No. He would not publish it ; he had enough of this. '"But," Mr. Roy said, "you must publish it." "Mr. r.'>y, I am master in my office." "Well ' said Mr. Roy, "you have no right to refuse me ; you have published this letter for thai Catholic and I have a right to answer it." "Yes," said Mr. Burrowes, "but it is the first time thai V • V • / Catholics have spoken and you have been speaking for weeks." Mr. Roy persisted and Mr. Burrowes had to take him by the shoulder and put him out of the office. Now what can be the reason of this change ; keeping silence for two years, mingling with those dangerous Jesuits in the exami- nation matters of the University of Manitoba, showing no disposition to quarrel with us and then suddenly bursting forth % ■ I do not know. However, I have been told by .some that it was the result of my having incurred his displeasure. It happened one day while we were correcting examination papers in French. There was one examiner from the Manitoba Presbjterian College, the Rev. Prof. Hart, one of the most straight-forward and kindly men I have ever met ; the hecond was Mr. Roy, the third myself. Prof. Hart said to me, '•! understand that you are going to give a lecture in a few days " to which I replied, I was. "Well," said he,^ "I shall be very glad to attend and Mrs. Hart would like to go also." I then said I would send him tickets. Mr. Roy remained there like ^ sphinx, not moving a muscle nor showing any interest in the matter. I did not feel it my duty, knowing what his sentiments were before, to foist an invitation upon him. Sometime afterwards we had a dramatic entertainment at the College to which we invited some Anglican and Presbyterian ministers, and several of them were very much pleased with the performance, but we did not send any invitations to ]$Ir. Roy for the reason given above. While some say that that was the cause of his out- burst, I do not know, but it is quite possible. Having now explained to you what sort of a man we have to deal with, I will proceed to consider his lecture. " The Jesuit has thrown the gauntlet, let the Pope pick it up, and we ignoran*,. Protestant libellers take the position of passive spectators. " Then he gives a summary of the Papal Brief. .This, summary is not correct. It is not in accordance with the Brief he quotes from. For instance, this sentence is not according to the Brief as we find it in the . following pages: "It speaks of their defiance of their own constitution,, expressly revived by Paul V, forbidding them to meddle in politics." Yen will see further on in the Brief that the Superiors of the Order admit that certain individuals had not followed its rules and had meddled in politics, but that only showed that the Ordqr really observed its rules and enforced them. We do not pretend to be an order of angels ; we pre- tend to be an Order of men who stick to their principles, and punish refractory members of the Order by expulsion or insist on a change of behavior. That is the only way for any religious order to preserve itself. After having given this summary Mr. Roy says : " See Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. XIII, Art. Jesuit, by Rev. R. F. Littlo- dale. The Elncyclopaedia Britannica is on the curriculum of the Manitoba Univer- sity, of which Father Drummond is a shining member, and where we sat together as co-examiners in modern lafiguages." The Encydopaedia Britannica. It is true that we sat together as co-exauiiners, but it is not true that the Encyclopaedia Britannica is now on the curriculum of the Manitoba 10 University. Probably he was not aware that this^ was not correct. In regard to modern languages, I was an examiner in French, English and Italian. On the English programme we had the question of ethnology and ethnography. We could not get any satisfactory text book on the spur of the moment ; so Dr. Bryce, of the Manitoba University, suggested to Dean Grisdale, an Anglican, and to me, that we should take the article in the Encyclopaedia Britannica on ethnology and ethno- graphy ; but when we came to consider the article, we found that it was altogether subversive of Christian principles, and in explaining it to their pupils, Dean Grisdale and Dr. Bryce had to correct the fundamental errors against Christianity contained in it. Wo therefore abandoned the Encyclopaedia Britannica altogether, and it is no longer on the curriculum of the University. I mention this as showing what an un- trustworthy authority Mr. Roy relies upon w^hen he quotes the article on Jesuits in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. I have had considerable ex- perience with the E. B., and am convinced that on all religious questions it is not to be trusted, especially on Catholic questions. It is systematically devoted to the misrepresentation of facts. When this article of Dr. Littledale's came out first during my residence in England, I read it care- fully, r found it extremely interesting as a most marvellous exhibition of skilful misrepresentation. I knew something of Dr. Littledale, having read his "Plain reasons against joining the Church of Eome." I had found out there, as many of his Anglican brother clergy have found since, that he was well up in this art of misquotation and misstatement, but he almost stagger- ed me once when I sec about refuting one paragraph on Purgatory, in his book "Plain reasons sgainstjoiniug the Church of Rome." I was asked to write a paper for the Months a periodical published in London. I took up the quotations of Dr. Littledale, and went to the authority to verify them. At first sight it seemed that Dr. Littledale was rii^bt, aud that the author from whom he quoted was not faithful to Catholic doctrine. That was the conclusion to which I was inclined to come to at first ; but after I had ex- amined the ponderous folio .from which he had taken his extract, T found that the context did not support his view at all. Therein was his skill, to take a text ou^ of the context on the top-knot come down principle, and then hurl it at you as a most convincing argument. Dr. Littledale is a marvel of learning, but learning prostituted to dishonest purposes ; and this is the man whom Mr. Roy takes as his great authority on the Jesuit question. If one hundredth part of what Dr. Littledale says in that article on the Jesuits were true, 1 would leave the Society of Jesus at once. " Now the Pope himself speaks : But so far you have heard only a summary of Clement's famous Brief " Doniinus ac redemptor noater." I will now quote this brief as given by Cr^tineau Joly, Histoire, religieuse, politique et litteiaire de la Compagnie de Jesus, Paris, Jacques Lecoffre, 1859. Crdtineau Joly is a friend and apologist of the Jesuits. The brief as given, by Cr^tineau-Joly, after Ijeing translated, reads as follows.' " I find that Mr. Roy has onrthe whole translated it creditably. He is thoi-oughly conversant with the French, and it is no wonder that he should have made a pretty good translation. There is one curious fact about this ) 1 11 document. There are many ways of looking at it ; but the way wliich Mr. Roy looks at it is the only possible decidedly wrong way. The others may be right, but this one is certainly not right, for he takes it to be an infallible document. .However, I will first suppose that it might be con- sidered as quite correct, and, yet on that view it gives to the Society of Jesus a very fair showing. There is frequent mention, in the Brief, of accusations against the Order, but scarcely any of these accusations were accepted by the Pope. He says — "In a word, there wm hardly an accusation of the most serious nature that was not brought up against this Society ; and the peace and tranquility of Christendom were thereby disturbed for a long period of time." But the Pope does not say that these accusations were true. Any one acquainted with papal documents knows that they are extremely clear and direct, that they are painfully tiresome in their reiteration ; they are in a word pf^rfect legal documents. And here there is nothing said in support of all those accusations. " Thence arose thousands of complaints against this religious community." But nothing is said as to their being proved. Then the Brief goes on to quote a very marked approval of the Society after all those complaints " Gregory XrV, of blessed memory, had but ascended the Pontifical throne when he gave anew, by his ball of June 28th, 1591, unqualified approval to the In- stitute of the Society." This was 51 years after the Society had been first approved. " He ratified and confirmed all the privileges which had been granted to it by his predecessors, and in particular that of excluding and dismissing the members of this Order without any judicial form." This paragT»»ph is one contained in the very Brief of Suppression. Then the quotation goes on : " But all these precautions could not allay the clamours raised against the Society, nor remove the eoinplaints made about it ; on the contrary tliere arose in almost the whole world the sharpest discussions concerning the doctrines of this Order, which doctrines many claimed to be entirely opposed to Orthodox Faith and to Sound Morals." Once more, does the Pojte say that these doctrines were really opposed to Orthodox F*iith and Sound Morals'? Not at all. He simply mentions the accusations. When we consider the circumstances m which this Brief was issued by the Pope ; when we know that m all the Bcurbon courts of Euro|w there was a conspiracy formed to destroy the Society of Jesus, we see why it is that he has to content himself with citing those accusationg and not confirming them. There is one little translation of Mr. Roy which is rather surprising. Ho says : •• The very bosom of the Society of Jesus itself was torn to nieces by external and internal dissen- tions." The word used in the French *' "d6chir6," which does not mean torn to pieces. " Tom to pieces " would imply the destruction of life, and those who know that at the time oi the suppression there were ' '^4* - t._:-s V2 1 22,000 Jesnita all over the world, especially in distant missions, where they worked with f;reat siiccess, cannot admit that the Order was torn to pieces. The Brief continues : " And, among the many charges brought againet that Society, there was the charge of seeking with too much eagerness and avidity, after the riches of this world." Again, this is mentioned merely as a charge. Next come words quoted from a decree of a Congregation of the Order. The Order's supreme Council is called the Congregation. It meets on the death of a Superior General to elect another Superior, or whenever certain members of the Order who are sent from our provinces every three years to the centre, whether it be in Rome or at Florence, as it is now, decide that a Congregation should be held ; and this Congregation can set aside the decisions of the General. The constitutions of the Order are a wonder- ful combination of the monarchical and republican principles Napoleon himself was so struck with this as to say tha"; if he had the constitutions of the Society of Jesus to apply to his empire, he could rule the whole world. The Superior General is elected, the other superiors are named by him ; each superior has counsellors, or consultores as they are styled in Latin, who appreciate his conduct according to the rules ' the Order, and report at headquarters. If a Congregation should oe called, all the decisions of the General may be examined by that Congregation, and, if need be, over -ruled. Now, in one of these Congregations held towards the end of the sixteenth century, complaints had been made that some of the Jesuits had meddled with politics and so it came to this decision. " But, whereas, in these troublous times our Order, it may be by the fault, or on account of the ambition and indiscreet zeal of some of its members, ia attacked in many places, and is evil spoken of to sovereigns whose good will and affection our Father Ignatius, of blessed memory, had advised us to cultivate so as to be more agree- able to God ; and whereas, also, the good name of Jesus Christ is necessary to the bearing of fruit, the Congregation has deemed it necessary to abstain from all ap- pearance of evil, and to prevent, as far as possible, complaints, even though based upon false suspicions." These words are quoted by the Pope as an authority. In a body which at that time numV>ered 14,000 or 15,000 men, who, under most difficult circumstances, had to fight againsit most disloyal enemies, was it any wonder that some men should have been indiscreet and imprudent, and should have thought they were serving religion when they were really mixing with politics, at a time when religion and politics were so inter- mingled that it was not always easy to determine what was political and what religious ] The final claute •* even though based upon false suspicion," shows that this is not a very serious charge. Then the Pope goes on : We have observed with the deepest sorrow that these remedies, as also many others subsequently employed, have been neither eflBcient nor poiverfid enough to des- troy and dissipate the disturbances, the charges, and the complaints about this Society ; and that our other predecessors. Urban VIII., Clement IX., X., XI. and XII., Alex- ander VII. and VIII., Innocent X., XI., XJI. and XIII., and Benedict XIV. have vainly endeavored .to restore the desirable tranquility to the church by means of differeiit constitutions, concerning either these temporal afi'airs, that the Society ought not to have interfered in, outside of its missions or in connection with them j^ r 13 or concerning grave .lisjensions and sharp contentic.s, which were raised by its members against the local bishops, the religious orders, the places consecrated to piety, and communities of every description in Europe." But you see these are only treated as hearsay by the Pope, " Or concerning the iw^er^jrci'a/joji and p^'actice of certain heathen ceremonies, which the Order tolerated and admitted in many places whilst it excluded those appi'ovid hyt the Church Universal" This is a serious charge and the Po]je seems to admit it, but I think that with a word of explanation you will understand that the fault was not such a great one. It it Wiiba fault, it was want of judgment, but it was not a wilful sin on their part against the teachings of their Church. In China, where there were many Jesuits at the time, there were customs observed in some of the families of which it was not easy to say if they were heathen ceremonies or fcimply tra- ditional practices in which there was no barm. Images of Confucius and memorial tablets of the ancestors of the family were kept in private houses, and candles were kept burning before them. Some of the Jesuits and other religious bodies in that country thought that this might be con- sidered as merely a civil rite, not heatlienish, and that it might be tolerated. Their reasons for tolerating it were that the Chinese clung so much to these practices that the refusal to allow them to do so would prevent other conversions. They thought that after all there was not very much difference between a Chinaman reverencing a memorial of his ancestors and a Christian kissing the photograph of his dead mother. But the Church, on mature consideration, decided that there was really danger of idolatry. I do not wish to defend our fathers. I believe that they were mistaken ; but I do not believe that they were seriously guilty before God. They forbade these practices as soon as they knew that the Pope had forbidden them. This seems to be the only charge which the Pope endorses in his Brief. Now comes'a very important avowal by the Pope when he says : " Being convinced that the Society of Jesus is no longer able to bear the abundant fruit or give forth the great benefits for which it was instituted, and approved of by so many of the Popes, our predecessors, who had granted to it splendid privileeea ; being convinced further that it was next to impossible, indeed entirely iinpossiole, for the Church to enjoy real and la;iting pc.ce while this Order exists * ^ * we annihilate and we abrogate all and every one of its offices," etc. This is the motive of the whole Brief. It was to bring a certain amount of peace into the Church. What was the reason that tho suppres- sion of the Jesuits was so necessary for peace ] I will prove to you from Protestant authorities that it was because there was a vast conspiracy against the Catholic Church in the last century, at the time of the sup- pression of the Society. The Society of Jesus was considered — rightfully or wrongfully I will not chose to decide — as the principal defender of the Papal authority and of Papal doctrine. Therefore, to clear the ground for an attack ^upon the fortresses of the Catholic Church, its enemies must first destroy the Society of Jesus. The Pope yielded, hoping that this might save the 14 Church from further attacks. Subsequent events proved that he was very sadly mistaken ; and many think that, had he remained firm, the French Revolution might possibly have never taken place. At any rate be sacrificed the Jesuits in order to have peace. A few lines further on in the clause — ♦"AH the statutes, customs, usages, decrees, coustitutions, whether ratified by OATH," etc. Mr. Roy prints the word oath in large capitals, in order to be able to refer to this afterwards as an oath of secrecy. Our constitutions may, indeed, be ratified by oath ; but the oath is not a secret one, and our con- stitutions expressly say that there is to be no obedience to sinful commands. Before indicating the practical measures to be taken for the suppres- sion of the Order, Pope Clement XIV says : " But, as the end we have in view, and which we ardently desire to attain, is to care for the general well-being of the Church, and the peace of the nations, and at the same time to succour and comfort every one of the members of this Society, every individual of which we tenderly cherish in the Lord, etc. " I ask you, are these the sentiments of a leader who is condemning re- bellious subjects 1 "When he says that he tenderly cherishes every member of the Society of Jesus which he is about to suppress, does he not show the spirit in which he performed that act ? Does not this make it pro- bable thai: what historians tell us is true, that, after he suppressed the Society, he spent his few remaining days in sadness, and in a sort of des- pair, going about the halls of the Vatican, saying "I was forced to do it V The se. ond successor of Clement XIV, Pius VII said to Cardinal Pacca, when Napoleon in the beginning of this century was urging him t. con- cede what was against his couscience : " I cannot make these concessions. Do you want me to die rAadlike Clamant XIV T Now I do not vouch for this any more than as being the private conversation of Pius VII with his secretary, Cardinal Pacca ; but it shows what was the common opinion at the time in the Papal Court. What was to be done with the professed members of the Society who wished to enter another Order ? Solemn vows are taken by the professed membep of the Society generally about seventeen years after they have entered the Order. The Pope expressly stipulates that, " if they had taken solemn vows, the time of probation shall only be six months " Which shows what the Pope thought of them ; be did not consider them as criminals ; criminals would not be allowed to enter any religious order in the Catholic Church ; and the fact that he only required the short probation of six months showed what opinion he had of their virtue. Now we come to a very important mistranslation made by Mr. Roy. The Pope says in the original : — "For it is our will that the suppression and abrogation of the whole Society as well as of all its officers, should from this moment immediately, fully and entirsly take effect, in the form and manner that we have herein helow prescribed." \ 15 Mr. Roy translates "herein above." The di'^^rence in French is the difference of only one letter ; it is the difference between ci-dessits and ct-desaous. I would not charge him with making a wilful blunder. I wish to give him the benefit of the doubt ; but it is a most serious mistake. If you take the text according to Mr. iioy's version, the publication of this Brief was all that was needed for the actual suppression ; but when you read "in the form aifd manner that we have herein below prescribed," you have to examine what follows. Now, in the rest of the Brief, such as it is, there is nothing at all about the manner in which the suppression is to take place ; but we know tha';, together with this Brief was sent to each of the bishops in the Catholic world, a document explaining how the suppression was to be effected. The formalities to be observed were so intricate as to place a bar to the complete fulfilment of the purpose expressed in the Brief. Some pretend that Clement XIV. wished to satisfy the enemies of tb > Society, and yet did not wish to have the work completely done. How- ever this may be, it is well known that especially for Roman documents the observance ot all formalities is absolutely necessary to their validity. The formality required here was this : The bishop of each diocese was to collect together all the Jesuits of each college, to send a delegate, or go to them himself and read to them the Brief of Suppression. With- out that, the Brief would not have its effect ; for it was not addressed to any one in particular, and it was not posted up on the doors of St. Peter's at Rome, as is generally the case with important Papal documents. Mr. Roy has no right to side with the Pope when the Pope suits him, and then oppose or ignore him according to caprice ; he has no right to blow hot and cold in one breath. If he wishes to make capital out of the Holy See, he must take the Pope's documents in the Papal way. Now, from the Papal stand-point, the Society was not suppressed in Prussia, in Russia, and probably not in the Province of Quebec, for we have no proof that the Bishop of Quebec ever read to the Jesuits the Brief of Sup- pression. He obtained permission from Rome not to read it and to allow them to remain as they were. Other biships obtained the same permission, so that the Jesuits were not at all suppressed in some parts of the world. Th^ey remained more especially in Russia. At the beginning of the pontifi- cat e of Pius VI, who was the successor of Clement XIV. The Russian J esuits were in a great state of conscientious perplexity. Of course those who are deeply prejudiced against us will refuse to admit that we can have any conscientious scruples ; but precisely as the best way to know the history of a country is to belong to it, so the best way to know the an Order is to be a member of it. Whatever peopllo I have never found greater sincerity than in the Society The Jesuit Fathers in Russia were extremely exercised in their consciences to know what they should do. The Brief could not be published unless the bishops read it out to the Jesuits, and the bishops did not promulgate i^. So lor.g as it was not read to them, they were bound by their vows of poverty and obedience. In regard to priests, seoular or religious, of coui-se tbe vow of chastity does not change. Onr history of may say of Jesus, ytui 16 the other hand, they heard in the newspapers of Europe that the Brief had been published in other countries. Tbey wanted to know -what they should do. They met in council. Some of them said : " Wo are hound to submit to the Pope ; "' otiiers said : "Yes, we are bound to submit to the Pope, but, according to his canonical regulations, you cannot leave the Order until you are canonically suppressed. Until that is^done, you have no right to use money as your own, you are bound by your vow." Whilo in this great s^ate of preplexity, they sent a messenger to Rome to see Pius VI, and Pius VI said to this messenger : " I want the Jesuits to remain as they are in Russia." He would not give any written document, for the times were too troublous, the French Revolution was at hand and the Governments of Portugal, Spain and France would have clamoured against him ; but he allowed them to exist there, and before the end of this century Pius VI formally re-estaV)li8hed them in the kingdom of the two Sicilies. In the first decade of this century, Pius VII re-established them in England, where they had always remained since the sup- pression. In Maryland, Archbishop Carroll, formerly a Jesuit, and the first Catholic bishop in the United States, hailed with joy the re-establishment of the Society in that great Republic. Finally in 1814 Pius the VII solemnly re-establishod the Order all over the world. Hitherto, making a concession to Mr. Roy, I have considered this r . ,ef as if it were infallible, but no Catholic theologian — and Catholic documents, if used against us, must be examined on Catholic principles — holds that it is an infallible document. An infallible document must be one which defines a doctrine, and not simply a letter (Brief means letter) containing a judicial sentence. The Brief of Suppression is not a Bull de- fining matters of faith or morals. All agree that such a letter is not an infallible document. Catholics know very well that the Pope is infallible only when speaking, excathndra, that is to say, from the chair of St. Peter, teaching the whole world doctrines that touch on faith or morals. Pro testants of course, who are enlightened, will know the same thing. Even Mr. Roy must be aware of this, for he quotes the very words of the Vatican Council. Outside of the circumst^inces in which infallibility is promised to him, the Pope may make mistakes. Only when there is ques- tion of solemn definition is he preserved from error. The limits of infalli- bility are very clearly marked, and this Brief has absolutely nothing to do with them, it is quite outside of them ; it might have been a mistake from beginning to end, so far as infallibility is concerned. Like the case of Galileo, it does not enter into the sphere to which infallibility is promised. Mr. Roy procpeds to speak of the death of the Pope. "Clement XIV. followed up this Brief by appointing a congregation of cardinals to take possession of the temporalities of the Society, and armed it with summary powers against all who should attempt to retain or conceal any of the property. He Also threw Lorenzo Bicci, the General, into prison in the Castle of St. Angelo, where he died a 1775. In September, 1774, Clement XIV. died after much suflTering, and the question kas been hotly debated ever since, whether poison administered by the Jesuits was <^e cause of hia death."' 1 I V 17 Now, I ask you if the General of the Order was imprisoned, and all the members of* the Order near and round about were suppressed and hounded down by all the governments, how do you suppose they could have got into the Vatican to poison the Pope ? Of course tJie enemies of the Society who never met a Jesuit are accustomed to stories about crypto- Jesuits and lay J^^^suits. On their theory, you neve.' know in what unexpected situations you may hit upon a Jesuit. Perhaps your cook or your housemaid may be a Jesuit, That is the Jesuit of fiction ; the Jesuit of fact, the real Jesuit is very different. There are no lay Jesuits, no female Jesuits, no crypto- Jesuits. Thus, even if Jesuits are held to be monsters of iniquity — an opinion which their prompt acceptance of the Brief that killed them, wherever it was duly promulgated, emphatically contradicts — the charge of poisoning Clement XIV. is too ridiculous to be listened to. Mr. Roy himself, despite his animus, merely insinuates it k la Littledale. On the Suppression and what followed it you will allow me to quote from an excellent pamphlet recently published by the pastor of St. Patrick's Ohurcb, my dear friend Father Whelan. It is one of the best I have ever seen. " I shall now read," says Father Whelan, ♦* from a reliable hand book lately published on this subject :"— "The Brief of Suppression is a valuable document in ihe history of the Society of Jesus, and it is especially remarkable, because, as is observed by Protestant Historian SchcfiU, it condemns neither the doctrine, nor the morals, nor the discipline of the Jesuits. The complaints of the Courts against the Order are the only motives alleged for its suppression. In Rome, although unfortunately some of the cardinals and prelates only too faithfully served the interests of the Bourbon Courts against the Society, the testimony of Cardinal Antonelli, one of the most eminent members of the Sacred College, gives ample evidence that this feeling was not universal, and in a report addressed to Pius VI. , only two years after the suppression, he thtis expresses himself : — "The impartial world recognized the injustice of the act." Cardinal Antonelli here speaks boldly. " And those who do not recognize it must be either blind or else bear a mortal hatred to the Jesuits. What rule was observed in the judgment rendered against them ? Were they listened to ? Were they allowed to bring forward their defence 1 Such a mode of proceeding proves that there existed the fear of finding them innocent." The Pope had written to Christophe de Beaumont, Archbishop of Paris, requesting that his Brief be published ; and Christophe de Beaumont, one of the brightest and noblest figures in the Church of France in the last century, wrote back to the Pope a remarkable letter, the purport of which was, "How can I do such a thing, when only^lately all the Bishops of France assembled together, approved of the doctrines of the Society, and protested against its suppression 1" Ajid then, he expostulated with him as a son would with his father, against the publication of this Brief. Cardinal Antonelli goes on : — "As for me, I aflBrm, without fear of error, that the Brief is null, invalid and iniquitous, and consequently that the Society of Jesus is not destroyed. My asser- tion is founded on a number of proofs, of which I shall be satisfied with bringing forward a few." 18 Mark well that this was wi-itten only two years after the suppression "The Cardinal then enumerates the reason* which, in his opinion, invalidated the Brief. 1 — When the Pope promised to suppress the Society he was only a private individual, unable to estimate the full consequences of his act. 2. — The BriejE was extorted from a man, fettered by his previous engagement, by those whose only object was to ruin the Church. 3. — In this infamous transaction, false promises, criminal threats and open violence were made use of towards the Head of the Church. 4. — The Brief was destitute of canonical forms reoiiisite in a solemn sentence of this description. It is believed, adds the Cardinal, that Clement XIV puiposely neglected these formalities, in order to render the Brief less bindmg. 5. — In the execution of the sentence, the ecclesiastical and civil laws of justice were ecjually violated. 6. — The sentence rests upon unproved accusations, and upon calumnies which it is easy to refute. 7. — The Brief contradicts itself, asserting in one part what it denies in the other. 8. — It contains confused and ambiguous expressions, and in the part relating to the simple and solemn vows, the Pope attributes to him- self powers that no Pontiff ever claimed. 9. — The motives alleged for the suppres- sion of the Society might, under the same pretext, be applied to every religious order, and the Brief is, therefore, an instrument prepared for the general destruction of religious orders. 10. — It annuls, as far as it can, a numbei of Briefs and Bulls, issued by the Holy See and accepted by the Church, without giving the reasons of this sweeping condemnation. 11. — It was a cause of scandal to the Ch u*ch, and a subject of joy only to infidels, heretics and bad Catholics. ' These reasons,' con- tinues Antonelli, * sufficiently prove the Brief to be null and invalid, and in con- sequence the so-called suppression of the Society is unjust and irregular. ' " I do not wish to say that this opinion of Cardinal Antonelli is correct. I think there are some inaccuracies in it. It is only the opinion of a fallible man who was in a high position ; but it shows what views were current in Rome shortly after Pope Clement's death. "As might be expected, the Jesuits, against whom accusations of regicide have been constantly brought forward, were charged with having poisoned Clement XIV. To so contemptible an accusation silence is perhaps the best answer. At the same time it may be mentioned, that even Protestant historians, and the enemies of the Jesuits deny it. Thus, in the letters of Gavazzi and Malvezzi, both men who had taken an active part in the suppression, the charge is contradicted ; and Frederick of Prussia, writing to D'Alembert, on November 15th, 1774, says : "nothing can be more false than the rumors of the Pope having died of poison. ♦ ♦ * He often reproached himself for the weakness with which he had sacrificed an Order like the Jesuits to the caprice of his rebellious children. * ♦ * During the latter part of his life his temper became gloomy and morose, and this contributed to shorten his days. " Moreover, the Pope's physicians, Salicetti, and Adinolfi, in an official declar- ation, asserted that the Pope's death proceeded solely from natural causes ; and their testimony was confirmed on oath by lather Marzoni, General of the Franciscans, and the intimate friend of Clement XIV., whom he attended during his last illness. I will now quote to you the words of three Protestants giving their general opinion of the justice or injustice of the suppression of the Society. "SCHOBLL, — Cours d'histoire des Etats Europ^ens, vol. 44, p. 71, says : War against the Jesuits became popular ; or rather, hatred and persecution of an order, whose existence was bound up with the Catholic religion and the throne became a claim to the title of philosopher." All that was required to pose as a philosopher was to declare oneself against the Jesuits. There must be a great many philosophers about just now. "Secondly, Schlosser— History of the Political and Literary Revolutions in the • ( ^ I \ 19 ( \ 8th century, vol, I : Some people had sworn irreconcilable hatred to the Catholic re- ligion * * * To complete this interior revolution and to take away from the ancient Catholic system its chief prop, the several Bourbon Courts, not knowing that they were thus going to place the instruction of youth in very diflFerent hands, united against the Jesuits from whom the Jansenists had long since tilched, often by dubious means, the esteem they had enjoyed for centuries." So SchloHser admits that it was a war of prejudice carried on by the Jansenists, a body that called themselves Catholics, but were steadily- repudiated by the Catholic Church as heretical. " GuizoT — Hist. France, Vol. 5, ch. 54. A strange and striking reaction in human affairs : the condemnation of tfie Jesuits was the precursory sign of the violence and injustice which was soon to be committed in the name of the most sacred rights and liberties. ♦ * • The destruction of the Jesuits served neither religion nor reason, for it was contrary to justice as well as to liberty ; it was the wages and the bitter fruit of a long series of wrongs and iniquities conunitted, but lately, in the name of religion, against justice and liberty. " The Society of Jesus was restored in 1814 by Pope Pius VII, no longer by a Brief, that is to say, a document of secondary importance, but by a Bull, a more solemn document, and in that Bull he says : '• The Catholic world unanimously demands'the restoration of the Society of Jesus. We daily receive the most earnest petitions to this effect from our venerable brethren the Archbishops and Bishops, and from other earnest persons. We should deem our- selves guilty of gi'eat negligence before God if, in presence of the perils that threaten Christendom, we neglected the assistance given to us by God's special providence ; and if, placed at *the helm of the bark of Peter, tossed by contmual tempests, w& refused to employ vigorous and experienced seamen to master the waves that threaten every instant to cause destruction and death." A few years ago, a certain Catholic clergyman, who had prejudices against the Society of Jesus, attempted to prove that the present Society of Jesus was not the old Society, but simply a new congregation. He published what purported to be a learned work on the subject, but it had not been long published before it was condemned by the present Pontiff, IjOo XIII. Afterwards, Pope Leo XIII addressed a letter to the General of the Society of Jesus, in which he shows that the Society was the same as it had ever been, and in which he confirms all the privileges granted to the Society by a score of Popes, except those privileges that were incom- patible with the common law of the Church, as it had been modified since the time of those Popes. He thus restored everything that could be restored to the Society, and he expressly said that it was the same Society as it had ever been. So, taking the Pope's view of it, there can be no question but that the Society has been re-established, as I said in my letter^ and not re-created. Mr. Eoy proceeds to make some apparently facetious remarks, which he prefaces with large print. << The Dead Lectnring the Living.'' "The Pope though 'being dead, yet speaketh' and, speaketh with infallible authority. He does more than speak, nay, he lectures. Hear, then, a dead infallible P<]{»e giving a lecture to a living Jesuit." 30 This makes me foel rather proud — to think that the Pope should take ihe trouble of speaking to me. "Your loyalty ! My rebellious son, after having suppressed you for ever, how comes it that you pose as a great patriot in Winnipeg when so many 'clamors and complaints' have been raised about your disloyalty ? I do not pose as a great loyalist. I simply said that many of us belong to old Canadian families. What an excellent reason I have for making use of these words "when so many clamors have been raised about four] disloyalty !" Have the clamors and complaints proved anything ? Unless they are proved to be true, they are not obstacles to my loyalty. This I have a right to affirm. "It was your continued opposition and disloyalty to sovereigns that forced me to suppress your Order, and you have placed yourself to-day in tne awkward predi- cament of having to deny my infallibility to get rid of the difficulty." No, I had not to deny the infallibility of the Pope, because no Catholic ever held that this Brief had anything to do with infallibility, and Pius YII in a subsequent Bull reversed what was only a judicial seutenoe. Jesuit Loyalty. As for loyalty, I said that most of the Jesuits in Canada are Canadians ; they are not importations from the Old Country who come out here and fatten on Canada. We have been here for generations. I do not want to be obtrusively personal ; but, since Mr. Roy chose to make a personal attack on me, I must mention some names. I will therefore refer to three well- known Fathers of the Society. Father Jones in Montreal, is, on both his father and mother's side, a descendant of U. E. Loyalists. You cannot easily get anything more loyal than that. Father Kenny is a son of Sir Edward Kenny, who was for some time acting Governor of Nova Scotia, and who is the very quintessence of loyalty. Everybody in Halifax knows who the Kenny s are, and you would be laughed at if you suspected them of being disloyal. My father was Attorney-General of Lower Canada for «ome years, and auiong other measures that he assisted in passing was the Reciprocity Treaty with the United Sfiates from 1854 to 1864, which as many say, produced an era of great prosperity. He also was the principal factor in the drawing up and passing of the Seigniorial Tenure Act. In doing this, he showed considerable loyalty to the best interests of Eastern Canada ; for, in reducing the rent roll, he brought himself into disfavor with his most intimate friends, bis father-in- law in particular, being the owner of four seigniories. But Lewis Thomas Drummond held bravely on his course for the fiike of the country ; he got the measure passed, and his legislation endures to the present day. Earlier than that he began his career of loyalty. He was bom in the most loyal country in the world — the north of Ireland. Is there any place in the world where the patron saint of loyalty might show himself with more e£fect than there 1 My father was bom in the extreme north of the north of Ireland, at Coleraine. He was brought up «mong people who had nothing but reverence for British rule. I remem* { J 21 b(r some years ago, when I was in Eogland, he uf>ed to send me Canadian', pupers, but if there was any seditious article in them, bo would cai-efully cut it out as a matter of conscience, least it should corrupt ray loyalty. He came to this counti-y at the age of 12, sV.«died P'rench thoroughly, and when the Rebellion broke out in 1837, he was able to view all sides of the question. Having recently come to the Bar at that time, he was chosen to de- feud the rebels. This was at a time when the whole country was in a ferment. His outspokt-n defence on behalf of the rebels established his reputation as a fo nsic orator; but those that heard him say that what they admired most was the polite respect he showed towards the judges who held in their hands the lives of those misguided men, a respect redolent of loyalty. My grandfather, on my mother's side, was the Hon. Peter Dominic Debartzch, who was a member of the Legislative Council in the 50 Prov. of Quebec some began in 1837, he believed like all the Catholic that the movement ought not to thought years ago. wnen tnai rebellion it neither lawful nor "Wise; he Priests, with the exception of one,, be encouraged ; and so he set his face againpt it. The result was that he narrowly escaped death. He risked his life in order to be loyal to the British Crown. Only a couple of years ago I met in St. Paul, a gentleman 80 years old, who told me that he had spirited away my mother when she was a girl, in order that she might escape those who were threatening the whole family. I think, therefore, that we have a right to speak about our loyalty. The fact is that in all countries in the world, the Jesuits, instead of being opposed to loyalty, have been remarkable for their defence of legitimate government. I do not think there is any country in the world were they were more attacked than in England, and yet several Jesuits who died on the scaffold because they would not believe in the spiritual supremacy of the Queen, took good care to say that they loved and reverenced Queen Elizabeth (ignoring the seamy side of her character), and that they prayed for her ; but they would not submit to her as Pope. They did not believe that she was- appointed by Jesus Christ. In the United States the Jesuits have always been first and foremost in loyalty to the Rfpublic. Father Neale, who- afterwards became co adjutor to the Archbishop of Baltimore, was a great friend of George Washington. On the 22nd of February, Georgetown, our oldest college in the^ United States, celebrated the centenary of its foundation. The President of the United States made it a point to be present. Nobody will accuse the Jesuits in the United Statea of being disloyal. In Belgium som& years ago. King Leopold I, a Protestant, said to one of his friends, speaking of the J esuit colleges in Belgium : "I like the education that the Jesuits give, be- cause they encourage the true national spirit." The same is remarked in Spain. Pombal. One very remarkable instance of Jesuit loyalt^ i,nd generosity, even to their enemies, is given in all histories that det.. with this question. The first person who started the persecution in Portugal against m 22 the Society of Jesus was the Marquis de Pomhal. He had been received at the Co'irt on the recommendation of a Jesuit, who had been deceived by Pombal's hypocrisy. The latter's object was to get the reins of power into his own hands and then unchristianiso the Kingdom of Portugal. The Jesuits were a bar to his antichristian pro- jects. He determined on their ruin. As soon as he had won the King's confidence, he slandered and persecuted the Order, and finally suppressed it in the Portuguese Dominions. One of his many cruel acts was the cast- ing them into prison, where he kept them for 17 years in horrible dungeons with hardly enough to keep body and soul together. Father Malagrida, who was considered a saint, and who had, both in Europe and in South America, labored with unsparing devotedness as a true hero, was strangled in the public square by Pombal's orders in 1761. Pombal himself was disgraced after the death of the King ; he was even condemned to death for his judicial murders and enormous thefts, though the Quaen allowed him to live on as a monument of despised iniquity. When he died, no one would bury his corpse. The Jesuits re-entered Portugal in 1829, and they found his cofiin still unburied in a chapel on the road between Lisbon and Coimbra. * * * The ]jriest who perfor- med the requiem services over his body was a Jesuit. That was their re- venge. Poverty. Mr. Roy proceeds : — " Your self-denial and poverty ! You now * brag and bluster ' about your self-denial and poverty, and that you work for your food and raiment only." No ; I did not speak of my self-denial. What I said was that we worked for our country's best interests with no earthly reward but our food and raiment. Put this assertion of mine or a basis of statistics. In this compensation for the Jesuits' Estates, ho v much is to be given to the Society 1 Do you know how much the sum amounts to for each individual 1 By tho Pope's distribution, we Jesuits get, out of $400,000, only $160,000." We are over 200 Jesuits in Canada, about one-third of whom are priests like ii>yself , the rest students preparing for the priesthood, or lay-brothers, who do the manual work in our houses, some of whom are carpenters, others tailors, or shoe- makers, or bakers and coaks, generally very poor cooks. Now, divide up $160,000 among 200 men. That does not give you much. Call it $1,000 capital at 5 per cent. It would give $50 a year. We live cheaply, but not quite so cheaply as that. It costs about $200 a year to keep each of us going. We do not spend any money uselessly, we do not wear fashionable clothes, we want about one cassock a year, which coats «omebhing like $14. Then we are not allowed to wear gold watches or jewellery. We use no money except in so far as we need it for travelling expenses or for immediate wants, we only use that with permission of our Superiors, and the Superior of the house has to give an account to higher superiors of \,he way in which the money is used. We carry no books about with us. If we want to read a bosk, we find in each house that we go to a common library, we select a book and put it back when we .v.. -fmmim 23 are done with it. For the last 20 years, I have always made my bed, swept my room and blacked my boots, and I expect to do so until I die. If that is not poverty, what isl It is not misery, but it certainly is not wealth. What is Mr. Eoy's answer to that 1 " Do you not hold a license not to observe the days of fasting, not to abstain from forbidden meats, and not to recite your prayers at the canonical hours, to advance or retard the reading of your breviary ? and by your license you thus make life more «asy." We have indeed certain permissions not to obser\ e the days of fasting, if we have a sufficiently good reason. I was working a good deal last week, occasionally preaching three times a day, besides hearing confessions for 5 or 6 or 8 houi*s a day, and being beseiged by all sorts of persons comj-" 2 to see me — not to attack me, I must say — the enemies of the Order never come to interview me, not, at any rate, as enemies. But all this is very tirijig, very wearing upon the human frame, and, therefore, I think, constitutes a sufficient i*eason to excuse from fasting. As to the breviary, that is not a very important permission, because every priest in the Catholic world has it now just the same as the Jesuits. " And by your license, you thus make life more easy." It is just the contrary ; I find it a busy life, not at all an easy one. If I wanted to lead an easy life, all I should have to do would be to find out that I have been mistaken in the doctrines of the Catholic Church, and set to work and proclaim that I have been per- verted by Goldwin Smith, or Mr. Eoy, or somebody of that sort, and start out in a crusade against the Jesuits. What a sensation that would create ! I do not think that I should have any difficulty in gathering in about $3,000 or $4,000 a year. Then I might like to take to myself a wife. That would be easy. And if she happened to die, I might take a second wife, as Mr. Roy did not very long ago. That, however, would be very difierent from the sort of a life I am living ; I think it would be a good deal easier ; but I have an idea that I could not feel, perhaps, as much ease of conscience, and that I might have some difficulty in getting on that side in the next world where I wish, and pray that I may spend my eternity. " And one of the reasons," says Mr. Roy, always speaking in the Pope's name, " as given m my Brief of July 21st, 17G3, for suppressing your Order in perpetuity, is it not ' your seeking after the riches of this world with too much eagerness and avidity ? ' And everybody knows of your commercial transactions in Paraguay and the infamous bankruptcy of Father Lavallette.' " I will say just one word about that. The Pope does not confirm, he only states the accusation, that we " sought for riches with too much eager- .ness and avidity." What Mr. Roy says about Father Lavalette is partly true. About the year 1765, Father Lavalette, a superior of the Jesuits in Martinique, wanted to clear away the debt. Most Jesuit houses are in debt. In Montreal, when first I taught there, there was a debt of $190,000 upon the church and the college, and the only means we had to pay that was the pension paid by the students at the rate of $150 a year. 24 I- This generally left a deficit of about $5,000 a year ; and, of course, an appeal had to be made to the people to help us a little. They subscribed $15,000, and we managed to get our heads above water, but even now the finances of that house are not flourishing. 1 have hardly ever seen any house of the Order which was not in debt, although thoy are supposed to be rolling in wealth. To return to Fatber Lavalette. He found himself in debt, and he thought he could pay off this debt by commercial transactions. It was a great mistake and contrary to the rules of the Order and the rules of all priests. He loaded ships with provisions for Europe, and if those ships had reached their destination he would have been able to pay ofi" everything ; but unfortunately war broke out, the ships were seized by the English, and he lost 500,000 francs. There was a great fuss made about the matter, the Order was called up before the Parliament and taken to task. Father Lxvalette stated himself that he had done wrong. He sent a paper to his superior saying that his fault was a per- sonal one, that the Society was not to blame, and he openly left the Society with the permission of the authorities, in order that his action might not in any way reflect upon the Order. The enemies of the Society overlooked his disclaimer, and fastened upon us the act of one man. If all societies were judged in this way, none would stand so iniquitous a test. There was no dishonesty, no unjust use of money, but sim])ly an imprudent commer- cial speculation, and yet Mr. Eoy holds this up to us as a crime, and adds : "And besides, was not your order suppressed in Canada in 1774 by a royal decree of the Imperial heretical Parliament of Great Britain ?" There is no proof that it was suppressed as a society, for the last Jesuit was known to be a Jesuit, living in Quebec in 1800. He was Father Casault. He was known to be the heir of all the Jesuit revenues, which then amounted to about $8000 a year. It was known that he always had his pockets full of money, that the good old priest would go about the streets of Quebec giving money to every poor person who asked him for it. He spent everything he had on the poor. This fact is undeniable. On education Mr. Roy says : "You claim to have done much valuable work in teaching. How dare you ! Read my Brief and refresh your memory ! In the bosom of your Society, scarcely out of its cradle yet, various germs of discord and jealousy had sprung up, which led them to set themselves up against the universities, the colleges and the public schools. There is hardly an accusation of the most serious nature that was not brought up against your Order." No ; I did not say anything in ray letter to the Free Press about the work we had done ; I spoke of the work we are doing. As to the past, I have shown that Pope Clement XIV does not pretend to infallibility on this point, as the very form of his Brief proves, and, in this particular passage he sums up his entire indictment as an accusation and nothing more. In regard to religion, Mr. Roy, with a heavy kind of humor, says : " You have written in black and white that your whole lives were devoted to religion, and religion ia the bulwark of society. But my rebellious son, which religion do you mean ? " N:~ 25 « I ' t In -what senne Mr. Boy can personate my father, it ia not easy to imagme. But let this pass. I mean of course the religion which I pro- fess, the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion. Mr. Koy emhraces the Protestant religion ; let him make the hest of it, but I hold that mine is best. " If the religion of Christ is the bulwark of society that religion is certainly not your own." Mr. Roy, yon are not infalUble, Then he speaks on patriotism, a matter which I have already touched upon. But what seems to have stung him to the quick is what I said about a useless secret society. "The Society of the Order of Jesus, we are told, is not a useless secret society, whose only purpose is to brag and bluster. But the Jesuit Order is a secret society." Mr. Roy's affirmation is no proof, and he gives no other. I have already told you that I dis- tinctly denied this in my MS. letter to the Free Press, and my denial was^ omitted by the printer. Mr. Roy continues : » " Peace and tranquility wUl not be restored to our Dominion, and the brag and bluster will not cease until Pope Clement's remedy be applied by Her Majesty's Protestant subjects." Protestants are thus called upon by Mr. Roy to persecute Catholics. Is this according to the Protestant idea of civil and religious liberty ] " We have been advised to study history better." I did not advise anyone ; I leave pomposity to Mr. Roy. I merely spoke of my friends who read history aright, and of my honest foes who should cease to be ignorant if they studied history better. If this cap fita Mr. Roy, let him wear it. He proceeds : — " An honest and sincere Jesuit, who thus ventures to speak, shows that he must have read the history of the Jesuits as written by themselves only. But as we are all blind to our own faults and never see ourselves as others see us, I would strongly advise Father Drummond, before he again lectures the general public on the study of history, to widen the range of his readings, and see how impartial, trustworthy, nay infallible, writers have written the history of the Company of Jesus." I am thankful to Mr. Roy for this. He alludes to me as an honest and sincere Jesuit. Now it seems to me very hard to reconcile those two things — that I should belong to such a black, damnable Order with all those horrible crimes about it, and yet be an honest and sincere Jesuit, who must have read the history of the Jesuits as written by themselves, dnfortunate- ly, I am forced to read the other side of the question. It may be possible for a Protestant to read only one side of it ; but in English speaking countries it is absolutely impossible for us not to know all about that Protestant side. It is thrust down our throats every day. Then comes the finale : — "A WORD OF WARNING." "The Order of Jesus was too much for a Pope. Extinguished, it revived again. To-day, the Order b too much for the bishops, who are afraid of it. Romanism i» ■ow synonymous with Jesuitism.' 26 This is a typical specimen of a covert attack upon Catholics. Unless a man takes bis stand as an ultra-Protestant, the proper thing to attack is not Catholicism, but Bomanism. Then, if he wants to go a little higher, and become more aesthetic, his objective point will be no longer Romanism, but Jesuitism. And yet Jesuitism simply means sound Catholicism. The following piece of refined jargon is worth reading as a curiosity : " The suppression of the Order of Jesus by Clement XIV was but temporary, as it was not followed by a radical reform of the Roman Church. The Order of Jesus is born of the spirit that animates that Church ; and not until that Church is regener^ ated, will she cease to give birth to such creatures, though disguised under other names." "The Roman hierarchy caimot now control the Jesuits. The Jesuits are masters ; the bishops and the Pope servants." The apportioning of the Jesuits' Estates was submitted to the Pope as arbitrator — not as having anything to do with the Government of Can- ada, but simply as arbitrator, precisely as he was arbitrator in the question that Prince Bismarck submitted to him in regard to the Caroline Islands. When the Pope decided that, out of $400,000 the Jesuits should only receive $160,000, he practically refuted Mr. Eoy, and showed that he was master, and the Jesuits servants. Listen to Mr. Roy's peroration : — " If a suppression of the Order is to come, it will not be eflfected by the Pope and bishops ; but by the combined efforts of the liberal-minded Roman Catlt olio laity, and the whole Protestant population of the Dominion and the United .Statea of America. A change must come. A change will come. Your rights must not, your rights cannot be thus trampled upon. It is impossible that in a Province of the Protestant Empire of Great Britain," which Protestant Empire to-day contains some fifteen millions of Catholic subjects — *' On the continent of America in the presence of forty millions of Protestants, and sixty millions of Catholics in North and South America, *' You should be governed by a handful of unscrupulous politicians, headed by a Knight of St. Gregory, whose conscience is so very delicate, that it forces him to give to the Jesuits, though not 'legally but only morally bound,' the sufti of $400, 000, and which amount, the delicate conscience of the Knight, will not shrink to extort from your own pockets." Mr. Roy's lecture began with fear and trembling for his pocket. It was a pocket question that gave rise to his choice of religion. What wonder that his tirade should end in the depths of other people's pockets ! Mr. Goldwin Smith. He tacks on to his pamphlet " An Array of Facts," by Prof. Goldwin Smith. Mr. Smith is a very learned man as everybody knows ; but the public at large has jio great reverence for his judgment, and, in this instance, his charging Jesuits with want of patriotism sounds supremely funny in the mouth of a strong annexationist. This letter of his I read when it came out in one. of the Winnipeg papers ; it contains not one Il 27 paragraph and hardly a single sentence that is true. Mr. Smith, like Dr. Littledale, is too well informed to assert that we really did assassinate three Kings. He merely borrows from the Doctor the "Jesuit in the background " theory. It is quite in Dr. Littledale's best style. They both insinuate, without adducing proof. Base insinuation is generally supposed, by the ignorant and prejudiced, to be a peculiarly Jesuitical practice. And indeed both these gentlemen have all the characteristics of the fictitious Jesuit whom they help to conjure up. But the live Jesuit before you has no hesitation in saying that Mr. Smith rather overdoes the part. He is a trifle too savage, when he sets us on a par with Thugs. It is easy to return the compliment. Mr. Smith might very well be called a literary Thug, who first feeds upon all the garbage heaped up by the professional slanderers of history, and then proceeds to lectiu'e the human race in both hemispheres upon all the fads that have found lodg- ment in his fertile brain. Talking people to death is his substitute for the lord of the original Thug. Mr. Roy refers me to several works, and hopes that I will not only study the heretical authors but also those of my own Church. As to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which he places first, besides what I have already stated about its untrustworthiness, I will merely add that Dr. Littledal e, despite his great erudition, occasionally shows astounding ignorance, as when he says ; " The numbers of the Society at present are not accurate- ly known." They are most accurately known. Had he been honest, he would have written to any Jesuit, who, by referring to the catalogue of the Order, would have given him the number. Dr. Littledale's estimate is about forty per cent astray. Of the seven other books recommended Mr. Roy says the last four are by Catholics. The fact is that one of these works is written by two infidels, and an other by^ a quasi-heretic. Mr. Roy himself is tlie best proof that the bearing of a French name is no sign of Catholicism. Michelet and Quinet, joint authors of a libel on the Society of Jesus, were two of the greatest enemies of the Catholic Church that ever wrote in France. They are thoroughly anti-Catholic. Pascal, who is of course trotted out by Mr. Roy, was one of the greatest French writers, but he belonged to the heresy of the Janenists, who were the sworn enemies of the Society of Jesus. Joseph de Maistre said of his Letters to a Provincial : "It is a collection of immortal lies." "I hope, however, he will not only study the heretical authors, but also those of his own Church. Then he may come to think as everybody else about the Jesuit Order;" Everybody else that Mr. Roy speaks to ; but there is a considerable portion of the world that is called the Catholic world, which numbers 250,000,000, and in that whole body, a part from a few cranks, or people who have not studied the question, you will not find one who will hold Mr. Roy's views. I will sum up what I have said in answer to Mr. Roy by quoting the very remarkable testimony of Mr. Blanco White. Mr. White, educated 28 as a Catholic in Spain, had renounced the Catholic religion, had come to England, and had been much made of by the highest Protestant prelates. Cardinal Newman, in his Present position of Catholics in Ungland, developes tbe idea that ultra Protestantism feeds upon lies against the Catholic Church, and the more absurd those lies, the more readily the ultra- Protestant believes them. To prove this point he gives two examples. One is that of Maria Monk's Disclosures, which were shown by Protestants to be mere inventions, but which are still a source of delight to some Protestants in many parts of the world. The other is the quiet argumenta- tive attack of Blanco White against the Catholic Church. It was the argument of a serious man who seemed to have been sincere in quitting the Church. It was a very forcible presentation of his views ; but it never went through one edition, while Maria Monk's Disclosures went oC in thousands. I quote Blanco White : "The Jesuits," he says, "till the abolition of that Order, had an almost unrivalled influence over the better classes of Spaniards. They had nearly monopolised the instruction of the Spanish youth, at which they toiled without pecuniary reward, and were equally zealous in promoting devotional feelings both among their pupils and the people at large. * ♦ ♦ ♦ Wherever, as in France and Italy, literature was in high estimation, the Jesuits spared no trouble to raise among themselves men of eminence in that department. In Spain their chief aim was to provide their houses with popular preachers, and zealous, yet prudent and gentle confessors. Pascal, and the Jansenist party, of which he was the organ, accused them of sysem- atic laxity in their moral doctrines ; but the charge, I believe, though plausible in theory, was perfectly groundless in practice. * « * The influence of the Jesuits on Spanish morals, from everything I have learned, was undoubtedly favorable. Their kindness attracted the youth from their schools to their Company; and, * * * they greatly contributed to the preservation of virtue in that slippery age, both by the ties of affection, and tho i/entle check of example. Their churches were crowded every Sunday with reguFe r attendants who came to confess and receive the sacraments. * * * * Th^ir conduct was correct, and their manners refined. They kept up a dignified intercourse with the middling and higher classes, and were always ready to help and instruct the poor, withoiit descending to their level. * * What- ever we may think of the political delinquencies of their leaders, their bitterest enemies have never ventured to charge the Order of Jesuits with moral irregularities. " Does this answer, says Cardinal Newman, to the popular notion of Jesuit? . Will Exeter Hall be content with the testimony of one who does not speak from hereditary prejudice, but from actual knowledge ? Certainly not ; and in consequence it ignores all statements of the kind ; they are to be uttered, and they are to be lost ; and the received slander is to keep its place as part and parcel of the old stock-in-trade, and in the number of the heirlooms of Protestantism, the properties of its stage, the family pictures of its old mansion, in the great controversy between the Lion of the tribe of Judah and the children of men. " In conclusion, my dear friends, I wish to say that whatever I have spoken has not been said in bitterness. If any wild man were to carry out the principle suggested in a certain pulpit, that he has a right to shoot a Jesuit^ I should consider that I had gained thereby j that I had accomplished my task in a shorter time. We, Jesuits, have already had 800 or 900 martyrs for faith and charity, and we gladly remember the words of Our Lord, " The hour cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doth & service to God." Such a death would be a priceless blessing. i f.: . r } 29 Without the slightest animosity, but merely through a love of justice and truth, I have lately heard echoing athwart the chambers of my memory the well-known words of Juvenal : " Semper ego auditor tantum nunquamne reponam ?" — " Shall I always be a hearer and never give a reply ] " I have giveu my reply ; and I earnestly hope that you will pray for the soul of Mr. Roy. 1