IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 5< I :/ ^ ^^ u. 1.0 I.I 12.0 I HJ& i^ IIJ4 U^ ^ 6" ► '¥ ^^ /A V ScMices Cornoralion 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 'V CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. / CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Micrcreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques i. Tachnical and BibHograpMc NotM/Noln tachniquM M bibliographiquM Tlw liwtltuts Imm sttMniitMl to obtain tho boat original luopy a v alabia for fHniing. Faaturaa off thia co|iy wfhich may ba biiillograpMcaMy uniqua. whinb may alto, any of tha imaga a in tha raproduction, or wiiiGb may aiQnificantly cnanji^ tha us- lai mathod of filming, aia diacliad balowr. H D D D D D CokHNod covars/ Couvartura da coulaur I I Covars damagad/ Couvartura andommagAa Covars ^aatorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura rastaurlia at/ou paNicuiAa □ Covortitia missing/ Latitm da couvartui D couvartura manqua I I Coiourod maps/ Cartas gtographiquas an coulaur Colou?ad ink (i.a. ottier than blua or bteck)/ Encre da coulaur (i.a. autra qua biaua ou noiral I — I Colourad platas and/or illustrations/ Planchas at/ou Hlustrations an coulaur Bound with othar matarial/ Rail* avac d'autras documants Tight binding may causa sImmIoims or distorticR along intorior margin/ Lara Sura sarrte paut causar da I'ombre ou da la dtetortion la long da la marga intAriaura Blank la a va s addad during rastoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar possiMa. thasa hava baan omittod from filming/ II sa paut qua cartainas pagas Manchas ajoutfes lors d'una rastauration apparaiisant dans la taxta. mais. lorsqua cala 4tait posslbla. cos pagas n'ont pas 4tA filmAas. AddUkmal commants:/ Commantairas suppMmantairas: L'lnstitut a microfNmi la mailaur axamplaira quil hii a «t4 poasibia da sa procuror. Las details da cat axamplaira qui sont paut-4tra uniquas du point da vua bibliographiqua. qui pauvant mo«flfiar una imaga laproduita. ou qui pauvant axigar una modMcation dans la mMioda normala da fflmaga sont indiqute d-da ss ous. I I CokMimd pagas/ D D D D P aga s da coulaur Pagas damagad/ Pagas andommagtos Paga s ra s to r ad and/or laminatad/ Pagas rastaurtes at/ou paWculAas Pagas discolourad. stainad or forad/ Pagas dteolortos. tachattes ou piqutos Pagas detached/ Pagas dAtachfes r~7| Showthrough/ Transparanca Quality of prir QuaKtA imlgala da ilmpranion Inciudas supplamantary matcrii Comprand du material suppMmantaira Only edition avaHabla/ Saule Mition disponlMe I I Quality of print varies/ r~| Includes supplementary material/ I — I Only edition available/ Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have bean refUmed to ensure the best possible image/ Las pagas totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un fauiNet d'errata. una pelure. etc.. ont At A fllmAes A nouveau de fa^on i obtenir la meiNeurs image possible. This item is filmed at tha reduction ratio checked below/ Ce documem est fHmA au taux rfa rMuctiori imiqui ci-deioous. 10X HX itx 22X 2SX 30X c 7 H MX MX 3ZX The copy filmad har* has baan raproduead thanks to tha ganarosity of: Lakahead Univaraity Thundar Bay Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha baat quality possibia considaring tha condition and lagibiiity of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacifieations. Original copias in printad papar covara ara fiimad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratad impraa- sion. or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copiaa ara filmad baginning on tha first paga with a printad or illustratad impraa- sion, and anding on tha laat paga with a printad or illuatratad imprassion. Tha last racordad frama on aach microficha shall contain tha symbol — »>(maaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (moaning "END"), whichavar appiias. IMaps, piattts, charts, ate. may ba filmad at diffarant raduction ratios. Thosa too iarga to ba antiraly inciudad in ona axposura ara filmad baginning in tha uppar laft hand cornar. laft to right and top to bottom, as many framas as raquirad. Tha following diagrams illustrata tha mathod: L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit grica it la ginirositi da. Lakahaad Univarsity Thunder Bay Las imagas suivantas ont iti raproduitas avec la plus grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattat* da i'axemplaira film*, at an Jionformiti avac las conditions du contrat da iimaga. Les axamplairas originaux dont la couvertura en papiar aat imprimia sont fiimis an commandant par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la darn!*ra paga qui comporta una ampreinta d'impraaaion ou d'iliustration. soit par le second plat, salon la cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmte en commen^ant par la pramiira page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreaaion ou d'iilustrntion at en terminant par la darnlAre page qui comporte une telle ampreinta. Un das symboies suivants apparaitra sur la darniire image da cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE ', le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent Atre filmte A des taux da reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre raproduit an un saul clich*. il est film« A partir de I'angia supiriaur gauche, de gauche A droite. at de haut en bas. an prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaira. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 T^\ m- • 'J-3 \' •^ ^' 1*1-. aESUIT. MMXms v' ■> ' i I J I II r I w V v." - 'p>if (KTa r.) ti 5 ^^ :ivv/ .'<> ■»' ^\ - r Eit. ■ ''si a!-' ■ S.^j,'. -p • ■^ , f*/ ^J ,-i^. l:' > ^.K ^^ ' * « L ^M '^u^i '.'«£ -t, r,■ ^{' "V ^ « ,( ', A"-it* M '.tr-v Hi*. , ■ V -v ■ ■' ^•• ■,, t- '^i-- ■V -■; ■. / .-^ '■'..' :'--•:•. )^^'- ■^- ■ --.-*- '■1:. •*':'■ •■^, ■ ^i*^ ^ ■ ■■ .^ iV.'. -i " '^.r -■<■ i '^c. ?■;." -'.^.^ ?- . -'-^^ ^ 1* -»'w v{. ; ■^s I'^y,- ^:-^■i■i:^ r-j^-w rr ■ ■■ "t; r'f -c « .-. . v.- Does ie IdJ Justify (American Quarterly K^vie-r^.^ January 1888 J Compendium Thcolo^ice Moralis, a Joanne Petro Gury, S J., priino Exaratum, .nunc vero ad Jkeviorcm Tormam Redactum. Ab Alovsio Sabetti, S.J.Ed. 'J'ertia. Neo-Eboraci : Pustet. 1887. Compendium Thcol. Moralis S. Alphonsi M. de Ligorio. Sive Me- dulla Theol. Moralis Hkrmanxi Busp.xhaum, S.J.,ab ipso Ligorio Adjectis Nonnullis Animadversionibus Probata. Ed. Altera Emendatior, Priori omnino Conformis.Iriit (i) : Typis Coisaris Giani. 1840. Two vols. 8vo, Thco/ogin Moralis in V. Libros Partita. Auctore Paui.o Laymann, Soc. Jesu Theologo. Venetiis : Typis Antonii Tivani. 1691. Two vols. Folio. Encyclopcedia Britannica (American Reprint). Philadelph Stoddart & Co. 1881. Vol, xiii., art. Jesuits. T J- M. In our last number we spoke of the popularity of F. Sabetti's abridg- ment of Gury's " Moral Theology " as evinced by the demand for a second edition, the first having been soon exhausted. Since then it has gained rather than lost in favor, and we are glad to see how well its merits are appreciated by professors and students. Every copy of the second edition was sold within six weeks from the date of publi- cation, and a third has been prepared by the publishers, Pustet & Co. Yet, in looking over these repeated editions one thing, and one only, has disturbed our equanimity. Mihi unus scrupulus ctiam restate as the comic poet says, qui vie male habet. We have looked, and looked in vain, throughout F. Sabetti's volume for some trace of that " recogniKed maxim of the Society," as Dr. Littledale calls it : " The end justifies the means ". How cruel of the good Father to take away from under Catholic heads that comfortable cushion, by the help of which, from the days of St. Ignatius to the present, his children have taught us to still any unpleasant murmur of conscience, and sin as we list, provided we decently veil it with a pious intention ! What a pity that by his silence he hes taken a»vay from the Littledales, Coxes, (1) Voghera in Upper Italy. 2 and other Protestant divines, their rivals in zeal and honesty, all chance of quoting and denouncing him in company of the Busenbaiims, Laymanns, Wagemanns, and other 'leading Jesuit theologians" who ** lay down the maxim " ! lk\t, seriously speaking, is such a maxim to be found in the works of Jesuit moralists ? And if so, who first wrote it, and when and where ? The latest writer to make the assertion on this side of the water is ]}ishop CJoxe of lUiffi;lo, who, though he cannot boast of profound scholarship «r extensive reading, is a i)leasing, versatile writer, and one who can pride hmiselfon the protean facility which enables him to assume at will every shajjc and form of religious metamorphosis. Catholic, Protestant, High-Ciu-.rch, Low-Church, as may suit his purpose. The only thing in which he is consistent is his fierce, unscrupulous hatred of Rome, the Catholic Church and the Jesuits. We heard him give vent to it very lately in Washington, where he sat among the members of the Evangelical Alliance — a " Catholic" Bishop and suc- cessor of the Apostles (to take his own word for it) consorting with ministers whom he regards as laymen, and some of them religionists of very doubtful orthodoxy. No one would suspect him of such recondite erudition as to discover, what his betters have failed to do, where the impious maxim lies stowed away in the thousand and one folios written on moral theology by Jesuit divines. No doubt he had, in addition to the fables o^ the nursery and Sanday-school, read something of the sort in the infamous diatribes of the French atheist, Paul Bert, circu- lated with loving zeal in England and America by pious ministers and their religious news])apers ; and further, in the writings of Rev. Dr. Littledale. with v/hich he shows himself very familiar. But neither of these men stands so high in the critical world that his mere assertion will compel assent, tience, when the "Anglo-Catholic" Bishop, in the course of his petty, dishonest warfare with the Catholic Church, thought fit to accuse the Jesuits of teaching that " the end Justifies the means ", he merely asserted it, adding nothing to prove his allegation. This was about a year ago, The foul charge was immediately denied by the Jesuit Faculty qf Canisius College, Buffalo. To their indignant denial they added an offer of one thousand dollars to Bishop Coxe or any one else who could sustain the slanderous accusation by a single reference to the page of even one Jesuit writer. To maintain his credit Bishop Coxe had to make some show of offering proof. The atheistical witness could not decently be sum- moned. He had not only vanished, but as witness he was doubly dead ; or rather, his testimony had expired only to rise again as testi- mony on the other side. Paul Bert had departed this life, a victim of the deadly fevers of Eastern Asia, whither he had gone to represent the interest of the French Republic in its commerce and conquests. His death was no misfortune, as his friends in France regarded it. It was a stroke of God's grace ; a blessing without stint or measure, and (humanly speaking) as undeserved as it was unexpected. Had he died at home, his last sighs for God's forgiveness would have been stifled by the importunate clamors of his infidel friends ; his attempts at reconciliation with the Church would have been baffled by the : I 8 vigilance of those foul fiends in human shape who, with hlaspiicnious derision, style themselves Angel Cluardians, and whose office it is ta see that those over whom they watch die in their sins and unbelief. Thus died Voltaire, Victor Hugo, the poet Leopardi, and a host of others : and the loss of their souls was huileil with the i>laudits of infidels, re-echoed by pious Protestants throughout the world. Wnt it was in the wilds of 'I'onquin that (iod, in His infinite mercy, sum- moned Paul JJert first to repentance and then to judgment. He renoun- ced his impiety and was reconciled to the (.'hurcli. So notorious had been Bert's hostilily to Revelation and the Catholic Church, which he logically identified with Christianity, thai the news of his conv'.'isioni startled all Kurope. Infidels boldly denied it, and good Christians were afraid to believe it on higher ground than the poet's I'l'i-iciilosiini ('.4t rrciiorc ci turn creiU'ie. But at last a letter from the French prelate under whose jurisdiction and ministry Paul ilert had died, dispelled all doubts, (i). Since, as all men know, no sinner can be reconciled to the Church without detesting and retracting all sins of impiety, calumny, and the like, it was plain enough that Paul Bert had ceased to be a witness on the infidel and Protestant side ; and common prudence dictated that his testimony should be carefully su])pressed, lest it should suggest to- incautious Christian-minded Protestants that a man is more likely to> tell the truth when he has before his face the solemn hour of death and the terrors of eternity. Bishop Coxe, therefore, had to discard his recollections of Paul Bert and fall back on his other authority. Rev. Dr. Littledale. Consequently he brings him forward, or rather his article in the " Kncyclopaidia Britannica," as a witness, furnishing "textual quotations from three Jesuit writers, fully meeting the challenge." This much we learn from- a recent letter of Bishop Coxe, addressed to the New York Clmrcli- man, and republished in the New York //i^/-(VH(r How (a.r may a guilty man go in the matter of escajiing punishment ? " In his answer lUisenbaum evidently sujjpo- ses "means" iiinocent in themselves, not bad, sinful means that will become ^ood because of the end proposed. For he distincly laysdown that in these means there nuisl bo no injustice, no invasion of the rights of others. Hence the escape must be effected without violence or wrong done to any one else (/»/7r(7.vut was he mistaken ? He was not. All moral theologians, all who treat of natural ethics, give the same answer Out of the thousands that might be (pioted we give only two, Archbishop Kenrick in his *' Moral Theology " (2), and Bishoj) Jeremy Taylor (3), a IMoiestant of the same sect ('• branch " they would have us call it) as Drs. Co\e and Littledale. We can now understand why Dr. L. so carefully suppressed all reference to the place of his " textual (piotation ". He trusted that his readers would take his mere word for any anti-C^atholic statement he might make, and he has rewarded them, as liicy deserved, by abu- sing their confidence and deceiving them. Bishop Coxe, we take for ! ; granted, never saw the ]jass;ige in the original, and erred, like the rest of that credulous crowd, in pinning his fiilh to the sleeve of his Angli- can fellow-worker against the Church and the Jesuits. But the error is a serious one. '' A teacher in Israel," as he claims to be, ought to have a little more discretion, and, it is no harm tf) add, a little more conscience. It might be well for him io take a lesson out of the moral theology taught by those wicked Jesuits, and endorsed by the Church. Thev say that it is a grie\ous sin not on!) to slander another, but alr-o deliberately to e\])ose oneself to the danger of slandering him by reck- lessly, and without due inquiry, accusing him of teaching what is blas- r phemous and subversive of the Ten Commandments. And the slander acquires a tenfold intensity when such wickedness is attributed not to one individual but to thousands of men, consecrated to (lod, and in / whose ho y lives a hostile world and the very slanderer himself, con- fesses tiiat he can find no matter of reproach. (4) (1) Ibid. . ■ ;/,.'," (2) "Theol. Momlis.'' «>d. ofMaliiies, Vol. l.,p 2t]0. ,, • (.'?) Ill his" Ductor Diihitanliimi," Lib. iii., ch. 2, apiid Kenrick, loo. cit. '* v ^ V - (4) Dr. Littiedole himself coiifesseH that, while many of the secular and even parochial clergy did not live np to their holy state of life. •' the .Jesuits won back respect for tlie clerical culling by their personal culture and the uniinpeacliat)le purity of their lives These are (pialities which they have all alonj^ carefully niain- ' tained, and probably no l)ody of men in tiie world has been so free from the icji/oach 6 Now. is Dr. l.ittU'dalo a safe guide, an autlmrity that an honest man could blindly follow ,' Kightcen or twenty years ago he would not have written as he writes now. He was then standing ahnost on the thresh- old of the Catholic Church and devising plans (it was said) for open- ing the doors of intercommunion between her and the Anglican •clergy. These |)lans failed, whether by the framer's bungling or by opposition from within or without, we art unable to say. But from that da\ |)r. \.. wa^ changed man ; and there are not wanting, even in his «nvn " brani i. ' some who attribute the change to mortified vanity. It has driven him back to be once more, what he was origi- nally, an Irish Orangeman. Not that he believes in " the glorious and ijnniortal memory " of pious King William, or would swear to * wade knif deej) in I'apists' bk)od " ; but that he entertains once more fm ihc (atiiolir Church that fierce, relentless hatred of which ()ran;,'(.nuii are the worst type, lie continues to be, however, a leader among the Kiiualists, abhors the very name of I'rotestant and denoun- ces the great " Ref()rmers," as a pack of the most unmitigated rascals that wtTi- ever seen in the world Yet, without having first made his pe.ii e with the " KeH^rmers," he knows how to pander adroitly to the prejudices, and work himself into the favor, of their children. He has written lately a book (i) to dissuade Ritualists from seeking salvation in the One, True. Catholic Church, l-or wicked slander and venom- ous misrepresentation of all that Catholics look upon as true and holy, the l)ook might have been written by an apostate priest such as "William Hogan, by the Hoyls and other clerical friends of Maria Monk, or (barring the decency of style) by that unmitigated rascal (as Dr. L. loves to call him), Martin Luther himself. The book contains about two hundred pages, and keen critics have proved that there are in it just that number of glaring mistakes, one to every page. And these mistakes are not of the kind that may be excused as having their origin in ignorance or negligence. They are deliberate misstatements, ranging from the sup!)ressio vcri io down- right mendacity. lUit the most frequent of them all is habitual MISQUOTATION, giving words " textually," and deliberately suppressing the context, because it would furnish their true meaning. He himself has confessed the truth of these charges by making alterations in the second and third editions of his '• Plain Reasons." But who could alter the spirit of his book ? The changes he has introduced are made in a grudging, half-hearted way, that shows them to have been extorted l)y shame and fear, not by candor and love of the truth. In a passage of diRcreditatile inemliers, or has kept up an equally high average level of ititelligeiite anrl conduct." (Art. Jesuits, p. G58.) On the next pa^e (GCO) lie admits that one of the most serious blows that damaged their credit, viz., the pub- lication of the " Monita Secreta," was a "forgery. Yet, with all this, he goea on so to explain, patronize, caress and fondle this idle story, that he shows evi- dently his regret that it was a forgery, and would prefer that peopleshould believe i\ to be true. (1) ■' Plain Reasons against Join"ng the Church of Rome." H. i i vituperative of Catholic theologians, he has painted himseU' and his controversial habits in such accurate colors, iluit we must transcribe it : " Things have come to this pass, that no statement whatever, how- ever precise and circumstantial, no reference to authorities, however seemingly frank and clear can be taken on trust, without a rigor- ous search and verification. The thing may be true, but there is not so much as a presumption of its proving so when tested, 'i'he degree of guilt varies, no doubt, from deliberate and conscious falsehood with fraudulent intent, down through reckless disregard as to whether the thing be true or false, to mere overpowering bias causing misrepre- sentation ; but truth, pure and sim|)le, is almost never to be fuund, and the whole truth in no case whatever." A capital picture, drawn from the inuKJst depths of self conscious- ness ! And is this the man, even though he speak through the pages of an encyclopiedia, who is to he adnulted as a witness against the Catholic ('lunch and her religious orders? The second (luotation from liusciibaum we have been unable to find, after an ac<;urate search through his " Medulla." We feel almost certain that it is not to be found there at all. It is the former jjassage, substantial in the sense, but slightly varied in the form of words. Dr. Littledale seems to have picked it up at second hand from some of the many German pamphleteers who, during the late Rullurkampf, attack- ed the Jesuits and their teaching, and cpioted the words from memory. The third quotation from lidymann has been already virtually dis- posed of in what was said of lUisenbaum. lie, too, is treating of the question, whether a man condemned to death can lawfully escajjc by night. He answers, yes ; and quotes many theologians of great name in his favor, among them .St. 'I'homas, Cujelan, Toletus, etc. "And to effect this (he adds), he may burst his bonds and break through the jail enclosure {vincula et carcercs perfriiii^crc). Ft)r to one to whom the end is allowable, to him also the means necessary for that end are allowable. Cui mi in concessus est finis, hiiic etiani media ad finem ncccssaria concessa sunt." (r) Dr. Littledale's form of words does not exactly agree with the original. Are we to suppose that he has taken this quotation, too, at second hand, and from some German Protestant or infidel source ? The fact that none but German Jesuits (Busenbaum, Laymann and VVagemann) are brought into play, would lend some color to the supposition. But our quarrel is not the mere change in form of the quotation. Why was the word neccssaria chan- ged into ordinata 1 Necessakv means for a good end, must always be good ; but bad means itiay be suited or adapted for that end. To propagate God's kingdom on earth, preaching and teaching are neces- sary and good means ; to hate and persecute those who will not come in, or drag them in forcibly, may be suited to the accomplishment of that end, but does not make them good means or lawful. We fear that this change was not honest. Latet anguis in herha. (1) Layman, Theol. Mor. Lib. i. Tract vi. cap. xv. p. G4 of the Venice edition, 169L The last quotation is from Wagemann's (i) "Synopsis." We are unable- to verify it, not having any copy of the book. To say that " the end determines the goodness of an action " is susceptible of a very good and true meaning. But it may also carry with it a bad and false mean- ing. Hence we have no hesitation in saying that the quotation has not been correctly given, and that its "terseness" consists in the excision of some words necessary to make it complete and unexceptio- nable. Dr. Littledale's notorious dishonesty in the matter of quotation forbids our taking his word on trust without accurate search and veri- fication. It is not the practice of our theologians to be loose or inac- curate in laying down principles in a text-book. It is not only the goodness, but also the wickedness of an action that flows from the end proposed ; and none of our theologians has ever failed to state this distinctly, especially in the treatise " De Actibus Humanis," where the sources and fundamental principles of morality are laid down and vin- dicated We gather at random a few examples. Kenrick sayr: : " Ex fine actus bonitas velmalitia etiamderivatur."(2) " From the end of an action flows its goodness, and likewise its wickedness." F. Sabetti : " Actus huraanus veram moralitatem {3) a fine desumit." '• Man's deliberate action takes its real moral character from the end." These, too, are the identical words of Gury.(4) F. Clement Marc (5) says : " Finis operantis tribuit veram moralitatem actui humano. ' " It is the end proposed by the agent that gives its true moral character to his deliberate action." And that very Lay- mann {()) who is triumphantly quoted by the Little iales, Coxes and other pious controversialists of their stamp, as a chief exponent of wicked Jesuit morality, says : " I maintain that this end (the end pro- posed by the agent) gives to an action a new specific character of goodness or wickedness." If Busenbaum had written a treatise " De Actibus Humanis," he would have said the same thing, for it is the doctrine of the Catholic Church. But does any Jesuit expressly lay down the doctrine that good ends will NOT sanctify bad means ? Yes ; all of them, without exception. Laymann says : " Sixthly, the adjunct of a good end does not help an action that is bad in itself, but lets it remain in its simple and thorough wickedness (relinquil simpliciter et undequaque malum)." (7) Gury says clearly : " Omnis electio medii mali est mala." (8) •' Every choice (1) This author died in 1792. His book was published abeut 1765. See Ilurter in " Noinenclator. ' ' (2) Theol. Mor., vol. v., p. 16. Op. cit., p. 19. (;i) Moralitas is not our English ''morality." In theological works it has a . technical sense, and means " moral relation or character," whether good or bad. (4) Compend. Theol. Mor., Romse, 1874, vol. i., p. 26. ' . (5) Institutiones morales Alphonsiana\ Romse. 1885. Vol. i., p. 193. (6) Op. cit., Lib. i., Tract, ii., cup. ix., p. 23. (7) Ibid. "Sexto casn," etc. (8) Ibid. p. 27. ' ■ -^r' \ 9 jM* of evil means is wicked (even where the end is good)." But what is the use of multiplying quotations ? Let one Jesuit be produced who has written a treatise " De Actibus Humanis," and has either deliberately suppressed or even innocently forgot to put down this teaching, and we will surrender our entire case. These falsehoods about Jesuit teaching are not new, nor are they confined to the English-speaking countries of Protestantism. The bigot, whose anti-Catholic zeal urges him to misrepresentation and slander,- is to be fou'id everywhere. In Ciermany, the birthplace of the " Re- formation," they have never been wanting. From the day when the patient labor of the Jesuits under Faber, Canisius and their disciples, first checked the spread of the new heresy, purged southern Germany of its leaven, and drove it back to its northern home, anti-Jesuit ca- lumny became the fashion, and lasted for hundreds of years, until about a century ago, when the Lutiieran clergy became skeptics and infidels, and cared as little for Luther as they did for the successor of St. Peter. After this lull, a revival of the no-Popery cry has revisited Germany, and the old, stale calumnies are repuljlished as boldly as if they were new discoveries, and had not been a thousand times trium- phantly refuted. What gave the first impulse was the partial freedom gained by the Church after the events of 1(848, which aroused the anger of those who had long enjoyed the pleasure of seeing her i)laced under the yoke of State supervision, and who seemed to regard it as their own loss that she should emerge from the chains of bureaucratic tyranny. To revenge their disappointment, the usual contrivance of attacking the Church through the Jesuits was resorted to. Their immoral prin- ciples, and, above all, the maxim, " The end justifies the means." were made the subject of unnumbered books and i)amphlets. Of the bad faith and wicked motives of these writers there can be no question. It is enough to say that amongst the impugners of Jesuit morality we find the name of that holy (!) man, the notorious Joannes Ronge, the " second Luther," as his tlatterers loved to call him.(i) These calum- nies, however, were not allowed to go uncontradicted. Father Roh, a preacher of some eminence, at the close of a successful mission in Frankfort (1852), which Lutherans and infidels had tried to impair by disseminating in print the wicked maxim attributed to the Order, read from the pulpit a declaration, to which he begged his hearers. Catholic and Protestant, to give the widest circulation. The substance of it was this : If any witness could produce a Jesuit author who had uttered the maxim, " The end justifies the means," literally or in equi- valent terms, .he would pay him a thousand florins (Rhenish currency). The decision was to rest with the Protestant faculty of the University of Heidelberg, or with the mixed faculty (Protestant and Catholic) of Bonn. This offer he repeated in the Protestant cities of Halle, in 1862, and Bremen, in 1863. Ten years and more had passed, and no one had accepted the challenge. At last a theologian, Maurer by name, (1) He died a few weeks ago in oliscnrity, despised or forgotten, unrepentant and unshriven, as generally happens to apostate priests. 10 took it up and published a pamphlet in which he claimed that he had proved his point and was entitled to the reward. All he could allege was the passage of Busenbaum already discussed (about a condemned prisoner's right to escape) : " Cum finis est licitus," etc. Of course, he furnished no context, to explain how or why Busenbaum had used such language. The faculty of Heidelberg would not allow his claim. Nor will it ever be allowed by any honest Protestant. One of them, Biichmann, calls the maxim a perversion or distortion of propositions found m Jesuit moralists (i). The same is said by another, Wander, in his " Lexicon of Proverbs." (2). And a third, Hertslet (3), positively affirms that the Jesuits never held or taught such a maxim, and attri- butes the hold it has on the popular mind to knavish romancers like Eugene Sue. It is a proud distinction for the Jesuits that their enemies can find no valid weapons against them, and are compelled to resort to false- hood and slander. They are in this point ftiithful representatives of the Church of Christ at this day, as she is of the primitive Church of the Apostles. Are our Protestant friends aware that they are repeating against us the identical slanders that Avere hurled at the Church in the days of St. Paul ? Then, too, wicked Jews and lying Pagans charged her with holding the blasphemous maxim, that evil may be done for a good purpose. (Rom. iii. 8.) [Rt. Rev. James A. Corcoran, D.D.] (1) Gefliigelte Worte, Berlin, 1882. " Eine Enatelliing Jcsuitisj'lipr 8iit/,e." Tin's popular book has reached a thirteenth edition. Quoted in " (Jescliiclitsiii rcri." I'n- derborn, 1885, p. 532, a valuable little book, -which we hope to sej triinsliited some day into English. (2) Leipzig, 1880, quoted, ibid. (3) Ibid. APPENDIX. {From the Brooklyn Cat/io/ic Revie7L<.) I- January 21, 1888. Mr. Arthur Cleveland Coxc, the Protestant Episcopal Bishop of Western New York, has ignominiously rejected a very open offer to win a thousand dollars from the Jesuits whom he accused of teaching the principle that the end justifies the means. It is a long standing offer made by Canisius College, but the bishop ha.-, wholly failed to come up to time. He was asked to prove his charge, and he gave as his authority an encyclopaedia ! Probably the bishop takes most of his theology and knowledge from encyclopaedias. 01)! Misliop Coxe. Hishnj) Co.ve! You're in the wrong l)ox, And von' re not orllioilox. The bishop made a spectacle of himself, as a Latin scholar, besides. He gave as proof that the Jesuits maintain that the end justifies the means, the maxim. Finis dctcrminat probitatem actus. "This met the bravado effectually," he says, of those who challenged him to produce from any Jesuit authority the passage justifying his accusation. Really, Bishop, if we were a teacher, and a twelve year-old boy were to present that Latin sentence as in any sense upholding that the end justifies the means, we'd whale him. Literally it reads. The end determines the probity of an action. It judges actions by their motives, and holds that a person must be judged morally by his intention. For instance, a pedestrian turns a street corner hastily and comes into collision with a woman, who falls down, sustains a fracture of the head and dies. Now, in fact, the man has killed the woman, but he did not mean to do so. He had no finis, no object in view in striking against her. He is therefore, not morally guilty of murder. But, in another case, the same man having a grudge against another woman, waits for an oppor- tunity to harm her, lurks around a corner near her dwelling, and, when he sees her, rushes against her, as if by accident, but really by design, knocks her down and causes her to sustain injuries that result in death. Finis deter^ninat probitatem actus. His purpose settles his innocence or guilt and his purpose was homicidal, so his act' on was murder. So the probity of the same sort of action, with the same sort of effect, is fixed by the motive, and in one case it was an accident and in the or.her a crime. This is as far from the theory that the end justifies the means as Bishop Coxe is from being a controversialist o/i whom his friends can depend for a victory in any dispute in which sound erudition and common sense are involved. II II February 4, 1888. The following letter appeard in the Indiatwjtoiis Journal, Jam ary 12 : Bishop Coxe and the Jesuits, Jo the Editor of the IndianopoUs Journal : Some time ago you published a reflection on Bishop Coxe, of Western New York. As I am a reader of your paper, and thinking that you will publish the other side, I now give you the opportunity. The letter was addressed to the Churchman, a Church periodical of New York city. " To the Editor of the Churchman : " A little more than a year since I had occasion to quote the Jesuit maxim, ' The end justifies the means.' To answer it, one of the Jesuit Fathers ii^serted the following bravado in one of our local journals of largest circulation : " ' Jf JJishop C(iXE can show from the authentic works of the thousand writers of the Society of Jesus that the Jesuits teach the principle that the end justifies the means, he shall receive the reward of $1,000, payable at Canisius College, this city.' "'This was immediately answered by the Bisho]) declining the reward, unless they were willing to send it to one of our benevolent institutions, but referring him for proof to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. VJII., p. 651, where are to be found textual quotations from the Jesuit writers (Busknhaum, Layman and WACiEMANx), fully meeting the challenge. The article quotes from one of thenj as follows : Finis determinat probitatem actus. This met the bravado efiectually, but, needless to say, the reward was not paid. The Jesuits contented them- selves with replying that this maxim does not mean that ' the end jus- tifies bad means.' (Answer: Good means require no justification.) I have accepted their challenge and given a responsible reference to which everybody has access. It would be easy to give other data, but who can bind Proteus? Enough ! It illustrates their maxim that they now circulate through the newspapers statements that ' the Bishop had never met their challenge.' I write this wnly to gratify friends who have inquired of me as to the facts " A. Cleveland Coxe, ' " Bishop of Western New York. " Had the matter caused no comment I should not have called your attention to the facts in the matter and asked for the publication of the above. . F. W. Henrv. Rector of Grace Church, Muncie, Ind. In reply to the above Rt. Rev. Bishop Chatard, writing to the Journal under date of January 13th, says : Ill '* Your issue of Jamiary 12 contains a communication signed by * F. W. Henry, Rector of Grace Church, Muncie,' in which is con- tained a very extraordinary letter written by Right Rev. A. Ci.fa'EI.and Coxe, Bishop of Western New York. Were it not that this letter is vouched for by Rev. Mr. Henkv, and that I know something of Bishop Ci.'XK, 1 should have hesitated to look upon such a document as coming from one of his standing. Some thirty-three years ago he was Rector of Grace Church, Baltimore, and giatified his feeling of hostility to the Catholic Church by a violent attack on the recently- defined doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, which taught that the Mother ot Chki.st never was stained by original sin as all the rest of the human race are. From I hat time to this he has seemingly let pass no opportunity of aspersing the CatholicChurch, his hetc voire. 'J'his letter is certainly extraordinary. That an Anglican Bishop should go to the Encyclopaedia Britannica for his theology is, I am under the im- pression, unusual. The source of information, we must charitably pre- sume, must be the Bishop's excuse, if possible, for the very serious statements and insinuations his letter contains; statements unfounded, to use a mild term, and insinuations that it would be dititicult to i)al- liate. Bishop Coxe accuses the Jesuits of teaching that " the end jus- tifies the means, " and refers to the Encyclopa;dia Britannica, Vol, VIll., p. 651, where are to be found citations from Jesuits, and he ends by quoiing from one of them : " Finis detenninat probitatevi dcfiis." He does not translate : he has been charging that the Jesuit maxim is, " The end justifies the means. " With all due respect, I would call the attention ot the Bishop to the fact that this is not the translation of the Latin phrase. Its real translation is, " The end determines the goodness of an act " — the purpose one has makes an act good or bad. If a thing is bad in itself, to do it is to have a bad intent, and this intent makes the act a morally bad one. If a thing is not good or bad of its nature, to do it witli a bad intent makes the act a morally bad one. If the Bishop, instead of going to the encyclopaedia, had gone to the source whence the extract was cited he would have found the following to enlighten his mind, were it possible to pierce his panoply of prejudice. I quote from the Jesuit author. ' J. P (iuRV, annotated by Antonio Ballerini, S. J. ' In the tract on Human Acts, he says. Sec. 29, ' Any choice of an evil means is a bad act ; but not every choice of a good means is a good act, ' because the purpose or end might not be good, for the end determines the goodness of the act. ' ^Vhoever uses a bad means for a good purpose is guilty of the wickedness that is in that bad means.' These are the maxims of the Jesuits, and any other imputation is without foundation. Si I. AS Francis Chatard. " III March 10, 1888. {^From the Independent.) Right Reverend Sir: — Yesterday your note of February 12th, inclosing the open letter, published in the/// excite the feeling of the ignorant and prejudiced against them. You strive to put them before the public as disloyal to the Constitution, and ha\'e the courage to bring forward a resolution passed by a tumultuary meeting in New York, to support your assertion that Catholics are '* in bondage to a foreign potentate." Truly, my dear Right Reverend Sir, your residence in Buffalo must have made you fall a little behind the times. Are you not aware that the audience to which you refer was a very mixed one ? Did you not know that beyond the insignifi- cant number that have shown contumacy, the Catholics of New York are giving a grand example of how freemen submit to the " sweet yoke " of Jesus Christ ? All New York knows this : you, it seems, do not. And then, how could you have the conscience to refer to Catholics as disloyal, when the records of our wars, the grand work of the Catholic Church through her j)ricsts, her chaplains on the battle-field, and her Sisters in the hospitals, is an open book to all? When to such acts, which s|>eak louder than words, we add the bright example of the "hated" Jesuits, who, in Maryland, in concert with liord Balti- more, founded the first tolerant colony of what is now our country," it is incredible that a gentleman of your jiosition should have wished to have from me an answer to the (jueslion, whether the Catholic Church in America will be loyal to the Constitution ! The facts are there to answer you. Next to her fidelity to God, all the affection of that Church is for this our country. And while the rest of you look hope- lessly around on the surging masses, powerless to control them, with no Church authority to speek in the name and with the truth of God, she alone gives the word of safety, curbs i)assion, lays down the law ot social life, and the masses hear her, for the\' know she is their best adviser, their mother. Vou know as well as 1 do. that the property- holders of Ametica, at this moment, regard the Catholic Church as the bulwark of Society, the only influence capable of resisting the flood of Socialism; and this thrt)Ugh the charity she iins from (jud, which loves the poor as well as the rich, while her temples, thank God, are the homes of the poor. Such is this Church against which an Anglican Bishop seeks to stir u]) the most bitter feeling and even i)ersecution. To come to my letter in the Indlanapoiis Journal of January 13th, which you style a gratuitous attack on you, I must say, first, it was not gratuitous. For the first time 1 saw this letter from you, to refute which mine was written, published by a clergyman of Muncie. Its gross charges against the Jesuits werj placed under the eye of my people, and before the non-Catholic cjmmunity. Such fiilsities I have a right and a duty to dispel. In spjaking of that letter you complain that I misrepresent your " sernirn "in Baltimore by calling it a violent attack on the Catholic Cnurch. I was only giving my impressions of years ago, for public opinion then gave you the character of the bitter enemy of the Church. As you object, I modify and use the term " vigourous " or *' determined " — in short something after the style of your present letter. Then you say I insinuate a want of theological knowledge on your part by the reference to your quoting from the " P^ncyclopaidia Brit- annica." Well, really, my dear Right Rev. Sir, without offence, I did not know whether on that particular point you had gone further. It was your best excuse that you had not, and that you had been led to trust to Dr. Littledale; though even that cannot excuse you. Now that I know that you have written so much, and have edited a work on the moral theology of St. Liguori, I am still more puzzled to under- stand how you could have written what you did. As I said in my pre- vious letter, referred to above, " If the Bishop, instead of going to the 'Encyclopaedia,' had gone to the source whence the extract was cited, he would have found the following to enlighten his mind, were it pos- sible to pierce the panoply of his prejudice. I quote from the Jesuit author, J. P. Gury, annotated by Antonio Ballerini. In the treatise on Human Acts, he says, No. 39, " Any choice of an evil means is a VI bad act ; but not every choice of a good means is a good act," because the purpose or end might not be good, for the end determines the goodness of the act. " Whoever uses a bad means for a good purpose is guilty of the wickedness which is in that bad means." Note, that this is the principle here taught to be elsewhere and universally applied in each particular case. This, therefore, is the authoritative maxim of the Jesuits, as far removed from your asserted maxim laid to their charge, that "the end justifies the means" as light is from darkness. I leave this before the public who will know how to judge between you and me. As for your — I must curl) myself to call it only cruel and unde- served — tirade on the Jesuits, I can only say that you have delved in the archives of their enemies to find charges against them. Any one who takes what was done against them during the latter part of the eighteenth century, as but little else than a fierce persecution by bad men, shows himself to be a shallow student of history. Even the sup- pression of the Order by the Pope, forced to it by the clamor of their enemies, proves nothing against them ; for that Papal document does not condemn them of crime, contrary to what you assert. I will not ])ursue the subject further. If in defending our theolo- gical teaching from attack I have come to the defence of the Jesuits who have been the foremost teachers of that theology, I am glad of it, for though not having had the honor of frequenting their schools, I have learned to respect them greatly as highly educated, ])ious. exem- plary men, an ornament and protection to society. I take for granted you keep away from these Reverend Fathers, and so escape the influence of their words. 'J'hey are, however, waiting patiently for your answer to their challenge. 1 refer you, therefore, to them for further discus- sion on this subject, and to Mgr. Corcoran's article in the last issue of the Catholic Qi/arteriij. One word more in conclusion. You began your letter with a criti- cism on the press of the country, which you represent *' as generally ready to do the Jesuits a service, on political motives". I think you are unduly severe on the newspapers of the country, thus making them organs of the Jesuits. This will be as new to them as to myself. What I see in the press of America is, generally, a love of fair play and sound common sense. To be sure the papers abound with extraordi- nary and unwarranted matter. But there is a winnowing process always going on among them, and when excitement subsides, they ordinarily reach the truth, and that is what we want. If we make mis- takes, they will undoubtedly take a special delight in waking up Homer when he gets sleepy. If just now you have been a little indiscreet in your attack, and they see it and disquiet you, you must bear it with equanimity as I will try to do when my turn comes. With best wishes for your welfare, faithfully yours, Francis Silas Chatard, Bishop of Vincennes. ^ .* ^^^^m^^w ''"»'. ^\ > 'I ' ij ' '■ ' ' iwff^'^^^-^i^^^^^^^'^y^m^^^imm^fmmmmif^mmmfmmmmm^mmf ;t" ^-tV. ■'■■'iA'- '■■■.-»•'-.■'■ .'■•■■J^'^ .' -^ ■^ Tr -it r -