Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2008 with funding from 
 
 Microsoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/apologeticaelemeOOhalprich 
 
APOLOGETICA 
 
 ELEMENTARY APOLOGETICS 
 
 FOR 
 
 PULPIT AND PEW 
 
 BY 
 
 The Rev. P. A. HALPIN 
 
 NEW YORK 
 JOSEPH F. WAGNER 
 
Mhil <©bitftat 
 
 REMIGIUS LAFORT, S.T.L. 
 
 Censor Lihrorum 
 
 LOAN STACK 
 3Impnmatur 
 
 4* JOANNES M. FARLEY, D.D. 
 
 Archiepiscopus 
 
 New York September 5, 1904 
 
 Copyright, 1905, by Joseph P. Wagner, New York 
 
Contenta* 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Preface v 
 
 I. Catholic Loyalty i 
 
 II. The Rocks which wreck Faith 4 
 
 III. Reason is a sufficient Guide for Me 6 
 
 IV. What is Faith ? 8 
 
 V. The Uses of Reason 10 
 
 VI. The Abuses of Reason 12 
 
 VII. Some Safeguards of Faith 14 
 
 VIII. The Boldness of Unbelief 16 
 
 IX. Why Men doubt in Matters of Faith .... 18 
 
 X. Of what Use is Religion ? .20 
 
 XI. One Religion is as Good as Another .... 22 
 
 XII. There is no God 24 
 
 XIII. There is no God 26 
 
 XIV. There is no God 28 
 
 XV. There is no God 30 
 
 XVI. There is no God .32 
 
 XVII. There is no God 34 
 
 XVIII. There is no God 36 
 
 XIX. There is no God 38 
 
 XX. God can not be known 40 
 
 XXI. God can not be known 43 
 
 XXII. Miracles are an Absurdity 46 
 
 XXIII. Miracles are Incredible 49 
 
 XXIV. Mysteries are Unworthy of the Human Mind ... 52 
 
 XXV. God does not Care for the World 55 
 
 XXVI. God does not Care for the World 58 
 
 XXVII. God does not Care for the World 60 
 
iv CONTENTS, 
 
 Page 
 
 XXVIII. God does not Care for His World 63 
 
 XXIX. God Cares not for His World 66 
 
 XXX. God has no Care for His World 68 
 
 XXXI. God has no Care for His World 71 
 
 XXXII. God exercises no Providence over His World ... 73 
 
 XXXIII. God is unsolicitous for Souls 76 
 
 XXXIV. God is not solicitous for Souls 79 
 
 XXXV. God's Providence stretches not out over Souls . . 82 
 
 XXXVI. God's Providence does not protect Souls .... 85 
 
 XXXVII. There is no Hereafter 88 
 
 XXXVIII. There is no Hereafter 91 
 
 XXXIX. There is no Hereafter 94 
 
 XL. There is no Hereafter 97 
 
 XLI. There is no Hereafter 100 
 
 XLII. There is no Hereafter 103 
 
 XLIII. There is no Hereafter 106 
 
 XLIV. Jesus Christ only a Man 109 
 
 XLV. Christ a Man Only 112 
 
 XLVI. Christ a Man Only 115 
 
 XLVII. Christ was a Man Only 118 
 
 XLVIII. Christ a Mere Man Only 121 
 
 XLIX. Christ a Mere Man 124 
 
 L. There is no Eternal Punishment 127 
 
 LI. There is no Eternal Punishment 130 
 
 LII. There is no Eternal Punishment 132 
 
preface. 
 
 THE chapters contained in these pages are an attempt to suggest a 
 method of presenting the basic facts of Christianity in the light of 
 reason alone. As much as possible the arguments advanced make no appeal 
 to divine revelation. They contain proofs drawn from natural sources only. 
 They are an essay in the direction of sustaining that the teachings of 
 religion are eminently reasonable. They are an endeavor to show that 
 man, led solely by his reason, is compelled to admit that, of all the views 
 entertained by mankind relatively to the origin and destiny of the race, 
 that view alone is to be accepted which is upheld by Christianity, and 
 especially by the Catholic Church. Infidelity has had the ear of humanity 
 smce the beginning. The reason therefor is discoverable in this, that it 
 has pandered to the common desire to remove all the restrictions with 
 which religion, divinely inspired, has sought to impose limits on physical 
 freedom, has sought to inculcate the saving idea that there is a law decreed 
 in heaven which coerces, with moral pressure, the lower inclinations of 
 human nature. The plan is a very simple one. It discusses all the 
 watchwords of incredulity which have had such destructive sway. It aims 
 at demonstrating, by reason only, that these rallying cries are only lures to 
 individual debasement and ultimate loss. It has touched upon the limita- 
 tions of reason. It has offered to point out the proper function of intel- 
 ligence and to assign to it its proper place and most becoming attitude. 
 These preliminary notions established, the plan proceeds to take up the 
 insensate clamor that there is no religion, no God, no hereafter, no hell, 
 no eternity, and of course does not omit that pivotal dogma that Christ is 
 neither a myth nor a man only, but God of God, Light of Light, very God 
 of very God. That the work has been imperfectly done is transparent. 
 These chapters are skeletons, in the literal sense of the word. There is no 
 flesh upon the bones, there is no blood in the veins, there are neither 
 
 V 
 
vi PREFACE, 
 
 veins nor arteries. The compilation is only a suggestion, but as such not 
 entirely valueless. There is no doubt that churchgoers need instruction 
 and need enlightenment upon the very subjects treated herein and, are 
 avid of information that makes no call upon their faith, but rather on their 
 minds. The matter for these sketches was found already prepared in the 
 theologies and philosophies used in our colleges and seminaries. With 
 these remarks we leave our experiment to the merciful consideration of 
 all who may be patient enough to look over these pages. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
Apologetica^ 
 
 A G>urse of Fifty-two Sketches for Short Sermons on Popular 
 
 Topics and Questions^ Maintaining^ Explaining:^ and 
 
 Defending: the Catholic Position* 
 
 I. CatboUc Xo?aIt?. 
 
 Introduction. — The need of Catholic loyalty, that is, the habit of 
 fidelity to our Catholic Church in its teachings and precepts. This 
 loyalty which is needed always, but especially now, is compacted of 
 loyalty of life or living, loyalty of will, loyalty of reason. 
 
 1. Loyalty to the life enforced by Catholic principle is the best 
 and only life worth living. 
 
 2. Loyalty of will — adhesion of our will to all God proposes to the 
 Christian through the Church. 
 
 3. Loyalty of reason, which rounds off the whole loyalty of the 
 Catholic. 
 
 Loyalty is fidelity. It may mean being true to friends, to country, 
 to ourselves, to principles, to God. Fidelity to God is highest and 
 most imperative. This loyalty is an adhesion to God in all His rela- 
 tions to man. God's relation to us finds its most perfect expression 
 
 z 
 
2 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 in what He has taught us to believe and to do. In other words, it is 
 the religion or the Church which He has established for our guidance 
 in belief and conduct. This loyalty is always a duty, but in these 
 times wherein so much opposition to the Church exists it is more 
 than ever an obligation. The loyalty of the Catholic to his religion 
 manifests itself in three ways. It is threefold devotion or loyalty 
 of mind, of will, of life. 
 
 I. Loyalty of Life is living according to the dictates of religion. It 
 is shaping our whole conduct according to the precepts of the Church. 
 It is unnecessary to state that the Catholic Church is the oldest and 
 the only Church. By the excellence of its notes and marks it should 
 elicit devotion. It is the essential pattern of all living. It makes for 
 the only life worth living. There are outside the Church beautiful 
 lives, but they are beautiful only inasmuch as they approximate the 
 teachings of the Church and are imperfect wherein they recede from 
 those teachings. Among the reasons which call for this loyalty of 
 life are the splendor of Catholic truth and Catholic ethics and all that 
 the Church has it in her power to do for the individual here and here- 
 after, for the family and the country — loyalty during life and until 
 and in death. 
 
 II. Loyalty of Will. This is adhesion of our will to the will of 
 the Church. It is implied in life-loyalty, but it goes to the further 
 length of not only strengthening exterior living, but of permeating 
 the interior man with the beautifying and vivifying principles of 
 Catholicity. The will must be loyally Catholic. It must, as it can, 
 control the whole man. It must dictate loyalty to all the faculties 
 and senses of man. It must command unquestioning faith and heroic, 
 if necessary, charity. It is well to remember that our will is our 
 own. We may do with it as we please. If inclined to doubt, the will 
 may compel assent ; if disinclined to righteous conduct, the will may 
 
CATHOLIC LOYALTY. 3 
 
 compel action. The life and the strength of the will are maintained 
 by grace and the channels of grace — i. e., sacraments. 
 
 III. Loyalty of Reason. We have, perhaps, against all laws of 
 sequence reserved this for the last place. This plan is introductory 
 to a series which aims at showing the rational foundations of our 
 faith and at presenting answers to the flippant, though dangerous, 
 objections which are the cant words of the age. Reason-loyalty is 
 the most needed. This loyalty is the subjecting our reason to every- 
 thing taught by the Church. It means unconditional, though not 
 servile, surrender. The first element of this devotion is found in 
 humility of reason, in acknowledging its limitations, in an unwilling- 
 ness to take for granted what is alleged against revelation, in a dis- 
 position of allegiance running through all discussion. The essential 
 altitude of reason is one whereby it confesses that God and the 
 Church can not be mistaken, but that it itself may and can be at 
 fault. The province of reason will be examined hereinafter and its 
 legitimate obligations established. Many are the advantages to be 
 derived from this triple loyalty. Enough is it to enumerate peace 
 of mind, loftiness of principle, happiness in this world and the next. 
 
II. ^be •Rochs TOblcb Mrecft jfaltb. 
 
 Introduction. — There is none of a man's possessions which is to 
 be more carefully protected than his faith. There is not one of his 
 holdings which is more constantly threatened. Sailing over life's 
 sea, rocks imperiling his faith are piercing the waves everywhere, 
 and narrow indeed is the channel through which he is to pilot his 
 way in safety. We assume that faith is more precious to him than 
 anything else that is his. It is not an assumption ; it is a certainty, 
 and a dread one. 
 
 I. What is a man's faith to him? Faith is the " argument of the 
 unseen." It is a chart well mapped out and marking unmistakably 
 the points of danger on the ocean of life. It describes the port 
 whence he sails ; it directs, in all kinds of weather, his journey toward 
 the haven of his destiny. It assures him that he derives his being 
 from God — that his whole being must tend Godward, and it shows 
 him the only way. It speaks of the unseen — of the unseen of his 
 past, of his present, of his future. It furnishes him with the knowl- 
 edge of the things that have been and are and will be. It brings 
 within his ken the whole path of salvation. Impossible is it to calcu- 
 late the advantages of faith. Impossible almost is it to enumerate 
 them. Such being the pricelessness of faith, what are — 
 
 II. Its perils? The perils which faith is exposed to 3ire manifold 
 and ubiquitous and extreme and insidious. They spring from every 
 quarter. They wear the guise of friendship ; they borrow the garb 
 of angels of light; they underlie adversity; they go hand in hand 
 with success. Society is bristling with those dangers ; so is wealth, 
 and so, beyond a doubt, is the flesh. The arch enemy of mankind 
 
 4 
 
THE ROCKS WHICH WRECK FAITH, 5 
 
 has his spear raised ever to wound and, if possible, kill faith. The 
 world passes it by — faith is not fashionable; it savors too much of 
 poverty and low birth and ignorance. Society sometimes wears its 
 livery because it is a token of respectability. But faith is a reproach 
 to the thoughts and workings of society; is a hindrance; is a 
 menace to its pleasures. The flesh has views diametrically opposed to 
 those of faith. Let us eat and drink and be merry, for to-morrow 
 we die. Such is the chorus of the flesh, and the tones of faith can 
 not be heard, so boisterous is the singing of the flesh, or, if heard, 
 they weaken the enthusiasm and mar the gaiety. As for the devil — 
 he is a murderer and a liar from the beginning, and faith is his per- 
 sistent and indomitable foe and accuser and judge. 
 
 III. Other dangers. Ignorance of the individual. He does not 
 know even the essentials of his faith. What he knows not, he loves 
 not, and if it bars his way, he hates. The ambition and the greed 
 and the selfishness of the individual weaken faith. So does riotous 
 living; so do the passions gratified unlawfully; so does evil com- 
 panionship; so likewise free and loose thinking about matters of 
 faith. More than anything else the lawless literature of the day — 
 books that are immoral, books atheistic, books cynical, books with- 
 out ideals higher than the inspirations of mere nature, books ridicul- 
 ing, caricaturing religion, its tenets and practices. These are the 
 dangers. The need of guarding against them is obvious. Keep 
 the faith. It will keep you here and hereafter. 
 
III. 1?ea6on I0 a SuWcient 6ul^e for (tic. 
 
 Introduction. — It is hard to say which is the more culpable or 
 more dangerous — disloyalty of words or disloyalty of action. Wher- 
 ever the greater guilt lies, this much is certain, that expressions 
 against our faith — so-called maxims derogatory to our Church — 
 are caught up even by children, and so are more widely spread and 
 in this time of so-called independent thought become war cries 
 around which the masses unfortunately are only too glad to rally. I 
 must use very frequently the epithet " so-called " because investiga- 
 tion will reveal that the terms express principles or facts which have 
 no foundation in reason or reality. 
 
 I. What is the meaning of the phrase at the head of this sketch ? 
 It means that my reason is sufficient for me in everything. It means 
 that by the unaided light of my reason I find the solution of all the 
 problems of existence. It means that I need neither God nor the 
 Church nor any man for my teacher. I can discover alone all that 
 is needed to be known regarding this life and the other. This 
 crude putting of the significance of the phrase used by so many is 
 startling. Nay, it is more — it is shocking. What is the truth of the 
 matter ? It is not a phrase that fact or reason is able to substantiate. 
 What facts can it bring to its aid ? Collect all the experience of the 
 past. Has any one man's reason sufficed to enlighten him as to all 
 that is required for his development as a man living with other men 
 and depending on some force outside of himself for his coming into 
 or his going out of life ? Has the collective reason of the race been 
 sufficient ? The pages of history give the reply. What has been the 
 teaching of Paganism? What is the teaching of philosophy so- 
 
 6 
 
REASON IS A SUFFICIENT GUIDE FOR ME. 7 
 
 called ? Has there been certainty, or conviction, or persuasion ? Has 
 there been accord? Have all discovered the same God, the same 
 duties, the same obligations, the same meaning of life? What has 
 been said about God and religion in previous ages and what is being 
 said now? No single man has found out every truth or any truth 
 plenarily. The same is to be said of the combined efforts of the 
 learned when they relied on reason alone, and the same will have to 
 be said until the end. 
 
 n. The " principle " is not supported by reason. Reason can 
 not prove that of itself it is sufficient to guide man in the intricacies 
 of existence. First, fact disproves emphatically the assertion of the 
 all sufficing quality of reason. Reason shows us the impotency of 
 itself in the settlement of what is most obvious. What is the first 
 fact that is forced upon individual reason ? The fact that it is lim- 
 ited; that its vision has a very near horizon; that there are things 
 not only above or beyond it or below it, but apparently upon its 
 level which it sees not, or, if it does see, sees very dimly. Reason 
 knows that it is fallible as well as limited — fallible inasmuch as 
 from very patent facts it deduces wrong conclusions. A man knows 
 that his reason has been busier correcting old views than making 
 new ones. The reasonable conclusion that the most experienced man 
 evolves is that he has made many mistakes in the use of his reason, 
 that it is very dark therein, that his whole being yearns for a light 
 which reason alone can not enkindle. 
 
IV. Mbat i0 faitb? 
 
 Introduction. — The more we inquire into the nature of the great 
 gift of faith, the more we may be impelled to withstand all attacks 
 against it, the more we may be animated to estimate its value and 
 to prize it at its true worth. So let it be considered first, that : 
 
 I. Faith is a gift. It is ours only by presentation. We have 
 not begotten it; we have not stretched out our hands for it and 
 seized it. It is not ours to summon as we please. There are 
 myriads in the world looking for it. It is a donation. It is 
 gratuitous. It comes from God, and no one forced Him to be- 
 stow it. Every Catholic, as his reason shows, as he awakens into 
 consciousness sooner or later, finds himself in possession of it. 
 God is not an " Indian giver." He never takes back faith from an 
 individual once He grants it. Yet it disappears sometimes, or 
 rather often, from the hold of the possessor. Like every other 
 gift, the gift, for example, of existence, God's concurrence, in order 
 to conserve it, is absolutely indispensable. When a man loses his 
 faith he interposes between God's action and his possession an ob- 
 stacle something like the short-circuiting of an electrical current — ^the 
 burning out of a fuse, for instance — and lo! there is no inter- 
 mediary between God and the soul in the matter of faith^ and the 
 grand, bright light goes out, and " life eternal is lost and the man 
 does not know " Thee — only true God and Him whom Thou hast 
 sent Christ Jesus (John xvii. 3). It is to be understood that nc 
 man loses the gift of faith save by his own fault. God never takes 
 it away. Man rejects it or man throws it from him. 
 
 8 
 
WHAT IS FAITH f 9 
 
 II. Faith is a gift of transcendent excellence, (a) It is the 
 foundation, the corner, the keystone of the Church, (b) The 
 root of that tree Nabuchodonosor saw in his dream (Dan. iv. 7). 
 (c) The beginning of salvation, the origin of justification, (d) 
 It raises us above brutes, above the senses, (e) It elevates us 
 above nature; it supernaturalizes us. (/) It is the assimilation 
 of our nature with the divine nature, (g) It is the dawning of 
 the beatific vision, (h) It is a new sense, telescopic in its powers, 
 (t) It is certainty in doubt. (;) A haven in the storm, {k) It 
 is the way, the truth, and the life. 
 
 III. It is delicate beyond the delicacy of anything in nature. 
 The hot breath of passion melts it as the sun dissolves the frost 
 creations on our windows or in the forest. It is as delicate as 
 chastity, as charity. The Christian graces are Chastity, Charity, 
 Faith. They wither at a touch — they are killed by a thought. 
 
 Conclusion. — Our care of this rare gift should be commensurate 
 with its preciousness. (Cf. Hurter, Vol. I, and S.S., passim et 
 ubique,) 
 
V. Zbe '\IiBCB of 1Rea0on, 
 
 Introduction. — Reason is the greatest human prerogative. It 
 distinguishes man from all the inferior orders of creation. By it 
 he is superior to the inanimate, the vegetable, the animal world. 
 Reason is given man to keep him from sinking below his inherited 
 level, below the beasts, below inert nature. It is a superadded 
 sense, if the term may be used. It is within his control to a large 
 degree; it is beyond his command in, perhaps, a still larger de- 
 gree. What is it and what are its uses? 
 
 I. It is a seeing faculty; it is the immaterial eye of the indi- 
 vidual. It perceives. Its object is truth. It does not make truth, 
 no more than any eye creates the objects depicted upon its retina. 
 The eye does not bring into being the thing it looks upon — that 
 thing simply floats into the area of its vision. Were there no such 
 object man would not behold it. For instance, the reason, or the 
 intellect of man, does not make it true that two and two are four, 
 but because two and two are four the mind sees it to be so. 
 Run through the wide domain of facts intellectual, axioms, 
 maxims, principles and the like — these facts are not products of 
 the mind; they simply are and present themselves to the mind 
 under investigating or favoring conditions. All this makes for 
 the dependence not of truth upon the reason or mind, but for the 
 dependence of mind, reason — call it what you will — upon truth. 
 We talk of creation in a literary sense. In the strictest meaning, 
 creation, that is, in the sense in which the term creation signifies 
 the making of something out of nothing, there is no such thing 
 
 lO 
 
THE USES OF REASON. ii 
 
 in the intellectual order, whether it be angelic or divine. Even 
 God does not create truth. God is Truth, and from Him all truth 
 flows into every created mind. Literary creation would, at best, 
 be only the harmonious wedding of truths already known or the 
 offspring thereby generated. 
 
 II. Another use of reason is the comparing one truth with an- 
 other, and from the comparison deducing other intellectual facts — 
 in TK'eighing the values of arguments adduced in support of some 
 proposition advanced. Hence, may be deduced the principal 
 function of reason — in other words, its principal use. Its duty 
 is not to imagine; imagination is another faculty below and sub- 
 ordinate to reason; nor to fancy, which is practically the same 
 thing. Neither is its duty to originate. There will be no difficulty 
 in understanding how originating in all matters, and especially in 
 religious matters, is the parent of absurdity and error. If reason, 
 unbiased, keeps its eye not on itself or its own vagaries, but on the 
 light; if it consult neither feeling nor interest, but only fact or 
 truth, the outcome will be the discovery of all that is needful in 
 many things, but especially in discriminating between what is false 
 and true in religion. 
 
VI. Zl)c W)mcB of 1?ea0om 
 
 Introduction.. — Reason is given man to enable him to ascertain 
 the truth in all things beneficial to his material welfare. Above all to 
 his spiritual welfare — the welfare of his higher, or rather, highest 
 nature. Properly used — used as indicated in the last instruction — 
 used as its very nature imperiously demands — it will lead to good ; 
 abused it will just as inevitably lead to disaster. It is a pity that we 
 must confess that man, a reasonable creature, has been most irrational 
 in the use of that very faculty whereby it is in his power to rise 
 to a height just a little lower than that of the angels. Man abuses 
 his reason. 
 
 I. Naturally all the misuse a man makes of his reason comes from 
 his misconception of the nature and object and limits of that sublime 
 faculty. He mistakes its nature, and, therefore, supposes that it is 
 in its power to make or unmake truth, that within the grasp of his 
 denial and admission lies the existence of truth. In another instruc- 
 tion we learned that reason does not make truth, but that truth is 
 made, or, rather, is for it, that truth existed before any human 
 mind, as the spectacle of the universe was before any human eye. 
 
 II. Man abuses the reason which God has given him by suppos- 
 ing that the whole region of truth is his to discover, to roam over, 
 to command. He so much revels in his reason, and his reason is so 
 much of a joy to him, that he allows it to gallop blindly, reinlessly, 
 hither and thither, as its own sweet will dictates. In other words, 
 liberty of thought is his slogan. A man can think what he pleases 
 and as he pleases. It is noticeable that one allows reason more 
 
THE ABUSES OF REASON. 13 
 
 liberty than one allows the senses, say, for there are things from 
 which one turns away and against which one shuts one's eyes. In 
 thought, so the axiom permits, there is no restriction. This freedom 
 of license of thought leads to boldness. And so another abuse of 
 reason is, 
 
 III. Unlimitation. No bounds to the gambols of this faculty. 
 No sacredness. No horizons. No remembering that there are 
 things twixt heaven and earth that are not dreamed of by reason. 
 This limitlessness of reason*s prerogatives begets a spirit of reckless 
 intrusiveness, for it assumes to be the sole umpire in matters of 
 truth and falsehood, of good and evil. In its wanton sportiveness it 
 is — is reason — its own law, and it legislates for God and man, for 
 time and eternity. This little farthing rushlight aims at lighting 
 up the darkness of the immensities. Alas ! What is the corrective ? 
 Watch the reaction of such excesses in history and in the race, in the 
 family and the individual. 
 
VII. Some Safe0uart)6 of ifaitb. 
 
 Introduction. — If it is important to save one's life, it is more im- 
 portant to save one's soul, whence arises the momentousness of pro- 
 tecting one's faith. Our view is rather a rational one than a spiritual 
 one, and hence the means indicated are all in the line of reason, and 
 directed against the difficulties which an inflated and rampant 
 rationalism creates against faith and in favor of so-called mental 
 independence. 
 
 I. One safeguard lies in a man's using his reason, not his imagi- 
 nation nor his fancy — lies in his following not the bent or dictation 
 of his passions, or of self-interest, or of policy, or of human respect, 
 but the inexorable rules of logic. To put it more simply, he must 
 be really reasonable, truly rational. Where a man can, let him think 
 for himself ; where he can not, let him consult those v/ho are in a posi- 
 tion to help him. This will form for him the very profitable habit 
 of not readily accepting all the teachings and gospels on matters of 
 faith which are continually coming into existence and just as rapidly 
 disappearing. The one great fact which takes up nearly all the 
 spaces of history is the extravagant caperings of the human mind in 
 matters of religion. This fact is as instructive as it is vast. It forces 
 one to a salutary distrust of one's own views. It compels one to 
 look beyond one's self for light and guidance. To the honest man 
 all seems so dark and uncertain that he looks around for some land- 
 marks to keep him in the path. Thus, an indispensable condition of 
 safety in this all important matter of faith would seem to be the 
 need of being on one's guard against what might be called the iin- 
 
 14 
 
SOME SAFEGUARDS OF FAITH. 15 
 
 tutored impulses of reason which invariably culminate in irrational 
 conclusions. The secure attitude seems to be one of distrust. All 
 this might be maximized thus: Slowness in admitting what the 
 populace readily catches up. Find the one who knows — find the ac- 
 credited teacher. 
 
 II. The second safeguard is the search after instruction, after 
 full information, after facts. The ignorance of Catholics concerning 
 their Church is as widespread as it is lamentable and fatal. Their 
 ignorance of the textual or surface meaning of the doctrines of the 
 Church, their misunderstanding of Catholic practices. Catholic de- 
 votions, their utter misinformation on points of Catholic history is 
 appalling. Many are not aware of what Catholics are obliged to be- 
 lieve. Few are able to give an honest inquirer the mere formula of 
 the simplest tenets of the Church. Many admit, through ignorance, 
 the false doctrines imputed to the Church, are unable, I will not say 
 to refute, but even to deny the frequent and patent calumnies which 
 are uttered. A man must know his faith. To this end he must 
 read, must hear, must learn. In this wise, his knowledge of his 
 faith increasing, his love for it will grow, and there will arise in his 
 soul an ambition to protect his grand faith for himself, to defend 
 it against calumniators and to propagate it among his kind. 
 
VIII. Zbe Bolbness of lanbellef. 
 
 Introduction. — In contrast with the modesty of faith and virtue in 
 general is the effrontery of unbelief. Enemies of religion accuse its 
 votaries of dogmatism. By dogmatism they mean arrogance in stat- 
 ing opinions and positive assertion without proof. This definition, as 
 all history attests, recoils on themselves. Recall all the propositions 
 which have been uttered by so-called reformers, so-called scientists, 
 so-called philosophers and infidels. We find that their affirmations 
 are: 
 
 I. Bold in the extreme. They are hold with the shamelessness of 
 hostility. Who can recall without shuddering the vituperations of 
 Voltaire and the French philosophists ? It would be almost not only 
 beyond good taste, but unpardonable to repeat what has been said by 
 the Gnostics, by Luther and his school, by the English Atheists, by 
 Diderot, and others too numerous to mention. They are bold with 
 the impudence of the unscientific nature of their averments. Their 
 conclusions are unfounded. They reason contrary to all the laws of 
 reason. From a particular and isolated fact they deduce general 
 laws. With a single misdemeanor or a few criminal acts they frame 
 an accusation against all religionists, all Churches, all authority. 
 Witness the progress of geology as against religion ; witness biology 
 and the cognate sciences. Notice the hastiness with which they pro- 
 nounce against faith on the strength of a single discovery in any of 
 the sciences. It is impossible for a new planet or new star or a spot 
 on the sun to be proclaimed, it is impossible for a new element or 
 new combination of substances to be declared, without their seizing 
 
 i6 
 
THE BOLDNESS OF UNBELIEF. 17 
 
 the discovery as a flamboyant herald dishonoring Holy Scripture or 
 foretelling the existence of all creeds. They are hold with the dastard- 
 liness of falsehood. They stick not at a lie. They utter calumny 
 after calumny. Their whole warfare has usurped the domain of 
 history with battalions of lies. Their whole procedure has been a 
 " conspiracy against the truth." The whole labor of Apologetics 
 may be reduced to the task of again and again hurling back the same 
 falsehoods in the teeth of the adversaries of faith. From all this we 
 may learn : 
 
 II. Hozv to meet this boldness of unbelief, ist. It behooves us 
 to be as bold as they are, as bold in denying as they are in affirming. 
 2d. They throw the burthen of proof on us, whereas all the laws of 
 ratiocination compel them to exhibit the evidence which supports 
 what they allege. 3d. To be assured that somewhere among the 
 enlightened, among our pastors, our theologians there is a satis- 
 factory answer to their bold, ignorant, false allegations. 4th. We 
 must remain undisturbed, undismayed. We are in possession of the 
 truth. We may not understand, but we know what we hold is true. 
 We know that we are passing, or rather that our faith is passing for 
 the moment through a trial which the faith of millions in the last 
 two thousand years sustained. Their faith came out vindicated, 
 purified, glorified, and so will it be with ours after this temporary 
 struggle. 
 
IX. mb^ fIDen Boubt in flDattere of Jfaitb. 
 
 Introduction. — We say advisedly doubt, because no one, Catholic 
 or non-Catholic, has ever been certain of any proposition which con- 
 tradicts the great truths of religion, revealed or natural. These 
 doubts exist in the minds of believers and unbelievers. The wonder 
 to the thinking man is how there can exist any hesitation in assent- 
 ing to the teachings of the Church, which has been in the forefront 
 of evidence since the coming of Christ. Two thousand years in 
 existence, and it wears no wrinkle on its majestic brow. The longest 
 lived of all the so-called Churches, it has lost none of its vigor ; it is 
 still erect and has not yet been attacked by any of the forerunners of 
 decrepitude; assailed more repeatedly and with more hatred than 
 any other creed, it shows not the mark of a single scar. Why, there- 
 fore, do men doubt? 
 
 I. Because of indifference. Men are too busy in seeking a liveli- 
 hood, too busy in the pursuit of wealth and fame. They permit 
 themselves to be absorbed by the cares of existence. The visible 
 world intrudes itself more strenuously upon their attention. They 
 look not beyond these horizons. The body and all that goes to make 
 up its comfort completely fills their vision. The interests of earth 
 seem paramount, and they hesitate when they are summoned either 
 by the voice of their conscience or by the voice of the legitimate 
 teachers. They have learned the lesson by their habits of thought 
 and by environment that this world is everything to which every- 
 thing else is subordinate, and so they walk along the pathway of life 
 in ignorance and indifference in the question of the eternal truths, 
 and hence no wonder their attitude is one of doubt. 
 
 z8 
 
WHY MEN DOUBT IN MATTERS OF FAITH. 19 
 
 II. Because of the passions. They deHver themselves up to the 
 exterior dissipations of Hfe. They follow wherever their senses or 
 the gratification of their inclinations calls them. They become the 
 slaves of their desires, immersed in libertinism. The flesh is all in 
 all to them. The spirit is weakened. Yet they must solace themselves 
 in their saner moments. To admit the teaching of faith would be to 
 admit the folly and the danger of their condition, would make them 
 dread future retribution. Reflection becomes agony for them, and 
 they console themselves by a doubting perhaps that what is said of 
 God and heaven and hell may be fiction, or, at any rate, exaggerated. 
 When does a Catholic allow doubt to enter his soul ? Is it when he 
 aspires to a better life? Is it not rather when having thrown all 
 the commandments of God to the winds he elects to remain on the 
 forbidden paths? 
 
 III. Because of what we might call the glamour of science. This 
 is a scientific age. Science seems to have run a prosperous race 
 and to have left faith behind. Science, when its voice is heard in- 
 distinctly, seems to proclaim itself queen, arbiter of matter and 
 thought in the universe. Among the aristocracy of intellect it is 
 more the fashion to assent to the conclusions of science than to the 
 declarations of faith. One can not be a scientist and a believer. 
 Hence belief seems to smack of lack of culture, of ignorance, of the 
 masses, of the proletariat. How many are misled by such views as 
 the foregoing! Yet how superficial it all is, and how uncertain the 
 foundation on which it rests and how easily refuted! It may be 
 said that of these causes of doubt the most dangerous and the most 
 prolific is indifference. 
 
X. ®f Mbat me is -Religion? 
 
 Introduction. — This is a question not seldom asked. The motives 
 for making this query are not a few. Some urge it because they are 
 indifferent, because it makes no difference to them whether there be 
 such a thing as religion or not. Others because they see so many 
 religionists no better, but rather worse, than those who profess no 
 religion. Others because they do not understand the meaning of the 
 term. Others because they are unwilling to admit the existence of 
 anything beyond this life. Others again because, so they pretend, 
 man has no obligations except to himself and his fellow men. The 
 adversaries of religion in general are those who care not for it, i. e., 
 those who are indifferent, those who are ignorant, and the materialist 
 or atheist. It is to be considered, therefore, 
 
 I. What is religion f A definition is hardly necessary, for it can 
 not be reasonably doubted that every one, though unable to give it 
 expression, has a conception, dim or clear, of it. This fact is already 
 an argument in its favor. It is an acknowledgment, is religion, of 
 our indebtedness to a superior Being, to whom we owe life and all 
 that life brings, and to whom, as a consequence, we owe gratitude, 
 honor, and obedience. If this Supreme Authority has declared in 
 any way His will to us, that will we are obliged to submit to. Re- 
 ligion is the sum total of our duties to God. To call, therefore, into 
 question the use of religion is a misunderstanding of the nature of 
 the highest Being as well as of our most important obligations. 
 When a man says, What is the good of religion? it is as if he in so 
 many words said. What is the use of God? What use is there in 
 man's fulfilling his most essential duties in life? 
 
 so 
 
OF WHAT USE IS RELIGION? 21 
 
 II. The importance of religion. Put plainly, the question we have 
 undertaken to answer sounds blasphemous. It sounds so because 
 it is so. It is well to translate the utterances of unbelief into their 
 every-day, commonplace language. Religion is of use because it is 
 important, and more important, than anything else in this world. 
 It is the first of all conceptions, I might say. It is fundamental. It 
 is the admission that God has created and, therefore, owns us, and 
 because He owns us He has inalienable rights with regard to us. The 
 fact remains that if the creature comes from God, and subsists 
 through Him, man may do only what God wills, and go through life 
 along the path appointed by Him, and tend toward the end God had 
 in view in bringing him out of nothing. 
 
 III. A few questions. Is this important? Is it important that 
 man should at every moment of his existence acknowledge his de- 
 pendence upon God ? Is indifference, in this matter rational ? Is it 
 safe? Because some who profess religion are not what they should 
 be, is it reasonable to blame religion for it? Are they not wicked 
 in spite of religion? Does religion teach them iniquity? On what 
 does the materialist base his view ? Is he sure there is no after life ? 
 Quite sure ? What is his proof ? Where is his authority ? Is there 
 no use in an institution which declares man's origin ? In an institu- 
 tion which enlightens man as to his primal duties ? In an institution 
 which makes for righteousness here and security hereafter? 
 
XL ®ne IRellglon te aa (5oob a^ Hnotber* 
 
 Introduction. — The error implied in this assertion is of close kin- 
 ship to the falsehood which is contained in the blasphemous question, 
 " What is the use of religion ? " They both are tainted with the 
 guilt of what may be called indifferentism. There may be said to be 
 two kinds of indifferentism. One is general, and applies to all re- 
 ligion. It might take this form of expression : It is a matter of no 
 concern whether one professes religion or not. About this miscon- 
 ception enough has been said already. The second species is ex- 
 pressed in the heading of this sketch. What a sweeping declaration 
 it is ! What arrogance and what ignorance it displays. It displays 
 arrogance first. 
 
 I. The presumption of the opinion is readily perceived when we 
 consider that it runs counter to the prevailing practice of mankind, 
 of whom the majority profess some form of belief with a persistency 
 and a loyalty which admits of no other form. It is a slur on the 
 early history of religion, of which so many members clung so stead- 
 fastly to one rather than to another creed, that they suffered exile, 
 persecution and torture, and death rather than surrender or change 
 in the least their faith. It is pharisaical inasmuch as the indifferentist 
 thanks God, if he ever thanks God, or if he has the crudest notion of 
 the Divinity, that he is not like other men. It would be difficult to 
 characterize the indifferentist; it would be difficult to tabulate his 
 mental conditions, and it might be dangerous to diagnose his moral 
 symptoms. As for his logic — and individuals of the indifferentist 
 stamp pride themselves on the inerrancy of their rational processes — 
 
 22 
 
ONE RELIGION IS AS GOOD AS ANOTHER 23 
 
 it is almost ridiculous enough to excite inextinguishable laughter. 
 For it is not to be sanctioned by reason that it matters not what 
 religion one professes, that one religion is as good as another. One 
 religion is not as good as another : 
 
 II. (a) There are religions, and their dogmas are contrary to 
 truth and their ethics an abomination. They propose what is untrue 
 for belief and for practice what is wrong. One religion, therefore, 
 is not as good as another, because there are some religions which 
 are bad. (b) In the variety of creeds which exist, some contradict 
 each other totally, and all contradict each other in part. Is it logical 
 to admit both the yea and nay of doctrine? (c) God is the founder 
 of religion. Is He equally the founder of contradiction and false- 
 hood? Are all religions equally acceptable to Him? (d) Christ 
 established one religion. He said to His apostles, teach all nations 
 to " observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Did 
 He teach His disciples all the errors, all the heresies, all the schisms 
 with which the religions of the world have been inundated? Did 
 He estabHsh one or many religions? If many, well might we ex- 
 claim. What was the use of His preaching? What has He brought 
 to mankind ? Heresy, schism, error did not need a divine propagator. 
 These things are human creations. Truth is one; God is one; 
 Christ is one ; religion is one. Is the God of indifferentism an ador- 
 able God ? Is He the most perfect being ? Is He substantial sanctity 
 and substantial truth if one religion is as good as another ? Arrogant, 
 ignorant, criminal, and blasphemous is the affirmation of the indiifer- 
 entist. 
 
XII. Zbcve IB no 6o^ 
 
 Introduction, — The expressing, the writing down of the above 
 affirmation shocks universally. It is an assertion which points to a 
 revolting order of intelligence and conduct. Not in all the languages 
 of the world, not in all utterances of mankind is there an averment 
 so horrible, so blasphemous, so ignominious. It reveals mental and 
 moral degeneracy of the lowest type. So abominable is it that with 
 exceptions which may easily be counted there is not a philosopher 
 who refuses to affirm that any one professing atheism is insincere or 
 brutalized. This is true of thinkers before and since Christ. Says 
 Cicero : " The existence of God is so manifest that I can hardly be- 
 lieve in the sanity of the one who denies it " (De Nat. Deorum. II., 
 44). " Nobody," says St. Augustine, "denies God save one whose 
 interest it is that there be no God." We may safely admit that God 
 is. Atheists there are, but not atheists of the mind, but of the heart 
 and the passions. It is false that there is no God, for it is true that 
 God is. 
 
 I. It is false that there is no God. One grows weary of defend- 
 ing the glorious truths of Christianity against enemies who advance 
 no new difficulties, but persistently repeat those which have been 
 urged since the beginning. Let us just as defiantly deny the atheistic 
 proposition as they boldly put it forth. Let us ask them to prove that 
 there is no God. Have they ever proved it ? Have they ever, with 
 all their ingenuity, framed an argument of which the propositions 
 are undeniable, and from which is logically deducible the conclusion : 
 God does not exist? All they have alleged amounts merely to a 
 
 34 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 25 
 
 slender, perhaps hanging on the gossamer thread of an unrea- 
 sonable doubt. Have they ever propagated their irreligion? that is, 
 propagated so as to plant in minds a conviction immovable, or to 
 touch hearts with a persuasion which remains in spite of threats, 
 persecution, and death ? It is to be remembered that we are treating 
 of what is termed theoretical atheism. Until more forcible proofs 
 than mere assertion are forthcoming, the belief in God's existence 
 will be an undisputed possession in the thoughts of men. This is 
 only a negative reply, but positive answers are not wanting. 
 
 II. While it is false that God does not exist, it must be true that the 
 existence of the Supreme Being can not he questioned. It must not 
 be forgotten in all these sketches we prescind from faith. Faith 
 makes every thing clear. Here and now we are appealing to com- 
 mon sense. It is obvious to the most uncultured mind just on the 
 confines of sanity that God is a word we have used and heard since 
 our childhood. Not only we have heard and used it, but, moreover, 
 we understood its meaning. Perhaps we grasped its meaning more 
 readily than the signification of anything else proposed to us. What 
 does this fact prove? It proves that the idea of a Supreme Being 
 is natural to the human soul, that this voice of nature is sincere and 
 unalterable. Says Cicero : " An opinion which has in its favor the 
 positive testimony of the human race can not but be true " (De Nat. 
 Deor., I, 17). And Aristotle declared that, "What all men hold 
 instinctively as true, is a truth of nature." This belief grows with 
 our development. If it weakens during the storm of passions, it 
 breaks out like a blaze at the hour of death. Like a rainbow, it 
 reaches from our cradle to our grave, and life would be dark without 
 it. This is a fact. Have atheists such a fact in their repertoire of 
 sophistries ? 
 
XIII. Zhcvc i0 no (5o^ 
 
 Introduction. — Once more let us stigmatize this declaration as the 
 most shameless, the most profligate ever made. To utter it there is 
 required an effrontery and a corruption which can proceed only 
 from a mind given over to pride or from a heart abandoned to every 
 wicked desire, and perhaps to the most grasping greed and the most 
 abominable lusts. The voice that speaks it is the voice of one dead 
 to the strongest instincts of nature, the voice of one who sets him- 
 self in opposition to his whole environment. Every tongue — the 
 tongue of man, all the tongues of earth, sea, and sky — proclaim the 
 glory of God. The tongue of the atheist alone emits the only dis- 
 cordant note in this grand chorus of creatures hymning the praises 
 of the omnipotent Creator of the Universe. " Whither shall I go 
 from thy spirit ? or whither shall I flee from thy face ? If I take my 
 wings early in the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the 
 sea, even there also shall thy hand lead me and thy right hand shall 
 hold me " (Ps. 138). What sphere, or what land, or what depth, or 
 what height shall the atheist and the scoffer inhabit to be screened 
 from the face of God? Repellently and indignantly we deny the 
 colossal falsehood, and confess that God exists, because, 
 
 I. Mankind has been in possession of this truth from the begin- 
 ning. Collect the votes of mankind, and the verdict will be an over- 
 whelming majority in favor of God's existence — a majority so over- 
 whelming from the beginning until this third year of the twentieth 
 century of the modern era that the opponents will be nowhere dis- 
 coverable. East, west, north, and south — wherever a human being 
 
 26 
 
THERE IS NO GOD, 27 
 
 breathes or has breathed, savage or civilized be he, every eye looks 
 Godward. Every heart has throbbed with a sentiment of the In- 
 finite. No matter how impoverished a language may be, it has 
 always the word God. Cicero sums up the experience of all history 
 anterior to his own day, and predicted infallibly the whole future 
 until the end of time in this regard when he says : " There exists no 
 people however barbarous which has not had the thought of God " 
 (De leg. I, 24). How many countries have been explored since his 
 age, and the word of the Roman philosopher remains unshaken. 
 This is a fact universal and incontestable. It is an assured sign of 
 truth. Hence the religious sentiment always alive is founded on rea- 
 son and verity. Before advancing any other proof, let us examine, 
 II. An Objection. But priests or legislators may have invented 
 religion, and thus have inaugurated the idea of God. We ask, are 
 heart-sentiments invented? Are instincts promulgated by law or 
 exhortation? Were priests before religion? Can the existence of 
 the priesthood be explained otherwise than by the preexistence of 
 the religious sentiment? Does not the fact that from the very be- 
 ginning legislators like Minos, Solon, Lycurgus, Numa admitted 
 that religion is necessary as a foundation for social stability ? Does 
 not this fact prove that the religious sentiment was deeply, power- 
 fully, and universally alive in souls ? Moreover, where does history 
 narrate the invention of the religious idea? Again, let us demand 
 from unbelievers whether all history does not mark them as isolated 
 monsters in the domain of events. The pity of it! They have 
 wickedly departed from their God. 
 
XlY. —Zbcvc He IRo (Bob* 
 
 Introduction. — This denial of a universally and admitted fact can 
 not be scarified too deeply. It is ever received by the generality of 
 mankind with instinctive and immediate repudiation. It is an insult 
 to intelligence ; it is an insolent disclaimer of the best and highest 
 thoughts and aspirations of all the ages since chaos first obeyed the 
 divine summons : " Let there be light.'* It was first uttered, not in 
 conviction, but in hatred and pride by the dragon with whom the 
 archangel contended while silence held the hosts of God. It is a cry 
 of rebellion — it is an echo of hell. It is impossible to fathom the 
 degradation of the heart whence such an apostasy will rush to the 
 lips. Scripture has put an indelible mark of infamy on this treacher- 
 ous denial in the fifty-second Psalm : " The fool said in his heart : 
 There is no God." Notice his heart, not his mind, spoke, and his 
 lieart was the heart of a fool made foolish by corruption and selfish- 
 ness. It is well in this all important question to profess our faith 
 in God's existence vigorously and fearlessly. Let us see what more 
 is advanced against the Christian, yes, and pagan and universal 
 doctrine — the doctrine of all times and all peoples. 
 
 I. An objection. Our adversaries say that this idea sprang from 
 the fear which shook men in presence of the great phenomena of 
 nature. We can not think this. Man's fear of God is not a mere 
 physical fear; it is not the fear of the brute; but it is a fear, or 
 rather, an awe, mingled with respect. Besides, men do not only 
 fear God, they love Him. Can this sentiment of love spring from 
 dread? Moreover, these phenomena are merely material. They 
 
 28 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 29 
 
 beget only an impression of themselves. For example: Thunder 
 might make men dread thunder — but why dread God ? What would 
 make men rise from them — from a dread of them — to a fear of God ? 
 Evidently man's intellect perceives some necessary relation between 
 these elements in wild confusion and the author of these elements. 
 The pagans converted these elements into gods and goddesses. The 
 Jews, and the Christians, and unnumbered minds of antiquity soared 
 beyond these entities to the infinite Being. Always, however, is 
 noticeable the instinctive idea of God. 
 
 11. That idea of God, moreover, is rooted deeply in the human soul, 
 is universal, and thus can not be the offspring of fortuitous, exterior, 
 and isolated causes. The cause is the nature of man created by God 
 and for God. These empirical reasons for the existence of the con- 
 ception of God — these assertions which endeavor to establish as a 
 cause of it fear or priesthood or legislation are unphilosophical and 
 baseless. One might ask why would priests or rulers make use of 
 religion in order to keep nations in awe if they were not aware that 
 every mind and every heart would receive an idea which their nature 
 in its first impulses had already inspired. What is the faith of our 
 entire humanity ? It believes in God. How did this belief come into 
 the world? Did any preexisting law impose it? Did it result from 
 a whim — a caprice ? No ! this belief, so common, so persistent, so in- 
 destructible, is a tendency which antedates reflection, which is irre- 
 sistible, which is involuntary, and which has been planted in the 
 soul by the author of nature. Is it within the power of the atheist 
 to give as good an accounting as this of his unbelief? 
 
XV.— TOere Us mo <5oJ>. 
 
 Introduction. — It would seem that the further we enter upon the 
 analysis of this assertion, the more it becomes apparent that it is an 
 affirmation not only flagitious in its nature, but helpless and hopeless 
 in its logic. No Catholic need mistrust his faith. He may fall in 
 with men whose sophistries will bewilder, but let him rest assured 
 that he himself is standing upon the security of truth, while his 
 opponents are building upon the shifting sand of falsehood. He 
 may not be able to pierce the armor of his assailant, but abiding 
 with him always must be the conviction that his position is safe. 
 Truth is not afraid of the light, nor of investigation. On the con- 
 trary, error stands in dread of publicity. The longer truth is propa- 
 gated the more brilliantly it shines. Whereas the wider the expansion 
 of error, the more visible do its vagaries and contradictions become. 
 Against the fundamental truth of God's existence objections are 
 constantly being urged. It does no harm to meet them. 
 
 I. Objection. — God and the other life are fables, myths. Belief 
 in the existence of God is the one belief that has taken the most 
 universal possession of all ages and peoples. Is it so with fables 
 and myths? Where are the old mythologies? How widely they 
 were spread ! How eloquently they were preached by the persuasive 
 elegance of poets and orators! The sword was drawn for them, 
 and the highest literature marched with them to conquest. What 
 is the attitude of the human mind toward them to-day? They are 
 laughed to scorn by all civilization. Is it so with the idea of the 
 existence of a Supreme Being ? These myths and these fables are only 
 
 30 
 
THERE IS NO GOD, 31 
 
 isolated phenomena — parasites and unwholesome fungi of diseased 
 and decaying intelligences. Moreover, let it be said right here that 
 these simulacra of religion make strongly for one great truth, or 
 rather for one splendid fact. They all of them admitted the existence 
 of gods, admitted the existence of a supreme God, " call him Jove, 
 Jehova, Lord." Nay, further, hanging above even Jupiter was that 
 still higher being they called Necessity, Fate. There never was a 
 religion professing atheism. 
 
 11. They object — our enemies do — that this universality of time 
 and space which we claim for the Christian tenet suffers many and 
 notable exceptions. There were in parts of the world, they say, 
 sovereigns and peoples who never felt the need of a God, who never 
 had a notion of religion. Were even this true, it would detract in 
 nothing from our argument. It would prove only that there are 
 certain families of the human race phenomenal in this regard ; whose 
 condition is below the normal, who, in fact, mentally and morally 
 have reached an exceptional and unparalleled degradation, who have 
 Ibst everything human save the outward semblance. But, fortunately, 
 it is not true. More thorough investigation has revealed that these 
 peoples have in the main been calumniated or misunderstood. Our 
 foes are hard pushed when they are driven to oppose against the 
 large civilized world a handful of unknown, unintelligible and 
 mumbling savages. Evidently they prefer to herd with lower 
 natures and be one with them in feeling and thought, as they run the 
 risk of being one with them in perversity and degradation of 
 character. 
 
XVL— trbere Us IRo (Bob. 
 
 Introduction. — There is no language too scathing wherewith to 
 rebuke the man who asserts that God does not exist. His position 
 should entitle him to no respect. He is an eyesore in creation. His 
 presence defiles humanity. He jars upon the tenderest chords of 
 the human heart. He insults the human family, of which he is a 
 worthless and pestilential member. He is an outcast. He has no 
 community of thought with the race. He is a murderer and a liar. 
 Intellectually and morally he is a leper, and undeserving of anything 
 save loathing. His doctrine places him beyond the pale of com- 
 miseration. He is to be left a prey to the gloom of his own thoughts, 
 and were we not influenced by Christian charity, his condition in time 
 and eternity would put him beyond the reach of our prayers in his 
 behalf to the throne of pity, whereon sits in undiminished infmite 
 mercy the great God whom he so unreasonably repudiates. He may 
 doubt, he may find insufficient the proofs furnished by common sense 
 and sound reason in favor of God's existence, but he ought to know 
 that no atheist has as yet demonstrably proved the contrary thesis. 
 
 There are other proofs of the Christian belief. I. " Nevertheless 
 He left not himself without testimony" (Acts. xiv. i6). Every- 
 where we find the testimony of the existence of God — in the arch- 
 ing heavens, in the restless sea, in the fertile earth, in our heart beats, 
 in the very dust of the road (Rom. i. 19). The visible world exists, 
 therefore God exists. Whence come creatures? From themselves? 
 When and how? Have we been from all eternity? If we made 
 ourselves, should we not have it in our power to limit or expand our 
 
 32 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 33 
 
 being? Who could impede us? Would we not exist by the very 
 force of our nature? Abstruse yet simple questions. If man did 
 not bring himself into existence, is it reasonable to suppose that 
 irrational things or inanimate objects made themselves? 
 
 II. Not only the world exists, but there is life, activity in creation. 
 This is but a repetition of the preceding argument. If there can be 
 no existence without some self-existing, unproduced first being, 
 neither can there be life or activity. It is worth while meditating 
 upon this. It grows clearer on reflection. 
 
 The same may be said of the order which regulates creation and 
 which offers such superb testimony to the actuality of a being who 
 made all these things that have their movement, number, measure, 
 and weight. There have been not many, but some, objections ad- 
 vanced against this process of ours. They say that all beings are 
 parts of one chain, one depending on the other for existence. We 
 may go from link to link forever, and need no first being as an ex- 
 planation. This, of course, may be gratuitously denied. It is non- 
 suited. It is thrown out of court. It is not proven. Were it proven 
 that such was the condition of things, it would yet be required to 
 substantiate that this chain — a line or a circle be it — came into ex- 
 istence of itself. Fancy, imagination, may admit this, but not intel- 
 ligence. By a reference to the palpable argument of cause and effect 
 we will always discover wherewith to satisfy us — that not only this 
 vast universe, but not even a mote in the sunbeam can produce an 
 adequate explanation of the why and wherefore of its being, except 
 by conceding that God is, and in Him all things live and move and 
 are. The contradictory hypothesis is as unintelligible as the develop- 
 ment of an atheist. 
 
XVIL— tTbcre Us no (Bob. 
 
 Introduction. — Again this blasphemous assertion calls for our at- 
 tention. It is a pity and a calamity that this phrase has ever burdened 
 human language. It is a disastrous declaration, for so many will be 
 tempted to make use of it as an opiate to dull any recriminations of 
 a guilty conscience. It has never been dictated by natural instinct 
 or by reason. The atheists, whom history portrays to us as publicly 
 manifesting their unbelief, have been proclaimed as men of high 
 uprightness of life. This testimony is by no means unimpeachable. 
 We know nothing of their inner life, of their thoughts, their aspira- 
 tions, their desires. They were not, as far as is known, convicted 
 of adultery or dishonesty. But they were guilty of insolence toward 
 their fellow men, which betokens a selfish and unsavory pride. They 
 were criminal in the highest degree, of treason not only to God, but 
 to individual man, to the family and to the state, because they en- 
 deavored to remove the primal and most effective check to all 
 wickedness. If a man is led to think there is no God, no judge, no 
 eternity, no heaven, no hell, what is going to restrain him when 
 passions or opportunity urge ? What is going to cripple his arm when 
 stretched out in greed or lust against his fellow man, society, his 
 country? We imprison our anarchists for their rebellious speech, 
 but what, is the doctrine of anarchy compared with the propagation 
 of atheism ? These men are ignorant, for God does exist. 
 
 I. It is an admitted principle that what is implanted in every 
 human breast, what is in the heart of man, in all places and all ages, 
 a constant desire, a desire irresistible, points to an incontrovertible 
 
 34 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 35 
 
 truth. Every man is impelled by the desire of happiness. This 
 desire never sleeps. It is innate in the most savage breast. Nor is 
 this happiness any kind of happiness. The human yearning is for 
 boundless, for perfect happiness. Who has fixed this hunger ? Who 
 has lodged it in universal rational nature? Clearly the author of 
 that nature. It is an effect, and must have a cause. Man can not 
 be its originator. It seems, therefore, to point eloquently to some being 
 who planted it, some superior being. That being is responsible. 
 Superior in every way to man, he must have in his possession some- 
 where an efficient cause of that bliss man so pantingly thirsts for. 
 There can be no perfect bliss except it be limitless. Supposing a 
 limit, there would be a desire for a possible beyond, and, therefore, 
 beatification would be incomplete. There is needed, therefore, an 
 infinite being. An infinite being would be God. 
 
 II. This argument, from universal desire, might be supplemented 
 by a consideration of Conscience. In the voice of Conscience we 
 notice two facts: Conscience forbids and Conscience threatens. It 
 forbids the performance of such or such an action. In that prohibi- 
 tion there is transparent the existence of a law. Not only does 
 Conscience proclaim the law, but simultaneously there is heard that 
 the offense will meet with retribution. The law manifested by con- 
 science and the guilty knowledge that we have of our wrong doing 
 are accompanied by the fear of the sanction of the law emanating 
 from a legislator. Who is this legislator, this legislator that lords 
 it so imperatively over every man coming into the world ? Can this 
 Lawgiver, so unmistakably forcing by the process of conscience His 
 power and authority over entire humanity since the beginning, can 
 this Lawgiver be anything or any one save the Creator of heaven 
 and earth — God ? 
 
XVIIL— ^bere Is flo (Bob. 
 
 Introduction. — That the atheist is to be relegated to the last 
 ranks of the race, if, indeed, he does not lose his family rights and 
 descends to the level of the brute, will be conceded by the over- 
 whelming majority of his fellows. Morally, his condition is, even 
 with the best construction we put upon it, unenviable, and if he 
 claims to be irrefutably convinced of his opinion, he is unreasonable 
 beyond expression. Morally, he is guilty of apostasy of the deepest 
 dye; mentally, he is guilty of a disloyalty to truth which is inex- 
 cusable. It is granted that there are no theoretic atheists. Yet 
 there may be men like those who lie in the beginning consciously 
 and by repetition of their falsehood grow to look upon their lie 
 as truth; there may be those who through bravado or blasphemy 
 or despair began by speaking atheism, and have come in the end 
 to believe in their vile and unpardonable assertion. Can we 
 imagine a more terrible chastisement than that which God inflicts 
 by withdrawing Himself from the mind as well as from the heart 
 of man? Romans, chapter one, would seem to hint at precisely 
 such a penalty. Man extrudes God from his mind, and God de- 
 parts. Inconceivable plight! Darkness here, and hereafter, what? 
 No God in time, no God in eternity ! We have considered some 
 of the protests made against the first truth of reason and the first 
 truth of faith. Some more may be pointed out and briefly ex- 
 amined. 
 
 I. Objections. Granting that order which is so remarkably dis- 
 played in creation, it is only proven thereby that the world has had 
 an Architect, not a Master, but one who simply shaped and fash- 
 
 36 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 37 
 
 ioned pre-existing material. If so, at any rate, we must admit the 
 superiority of the builder to the building. Furthermore, what is 
 meant by the Cosmic order? It does not imply merely the external 
 appearances, accidental shapes. It goes to the very essence — it con- 
 trols the entirety of the being, its forces, and its innumerable re- 
 lations. This can be seen in a grain of sand, in a drop of water, 
 in a blade of grass just as clearly as in the boundless ocean or 
 illimitable forests, or solar systems and planets and stellar orbs 
 coursing without conflict in appointed paths and through the vast 
 territories of space. Whence it may be concluded that the struc- 
 ture of the universe imports that, as forces flow from essences the 
 architect could not rear this magnificent temple without com- 
 manding essences as well as forces, and thus must be hailed not 
 only as the Builder by excellence, but the Creator as well — com- 
 manding the totality of every individual thing that exists. He is 
 not only the Constructing Agent, but the Designer and the Creator. 
 II. A second objection has been raised. Creation, it is said, 
 is the producing of something out of nothing. But out of nothing, 
 nothing can be made, therefore, creation is inadmissible. This 
 without any hesitation may be pronounced puerile. It is an old 
 protest, as old as the Epicureans. Nothing, of course, can not 
 be the material cause of any existence. Though there was a period 
 when all created things were nothing, there never was a period 
 when God was not. God did not create out of nothing as a some* 
 thing from which He produced things. He said, " Let creation be," 
 and creation was. He waved the sceptre of His omnipotence over 
 the empty void, and lo ! the abyss teemed with beings. When 
 driven in one way the atheists clamor, " There is no cause, but 
 only succession ;" when driven in another, they cry, " No succes- 
 sion, but only cause." 
 
XIX.— ^bcre lis mo (Bob. 
 
 Introduction. — The attack upon the great truth of the existence 
 of God has been virulent and constant. It has been perpetrated 
 by men of erudition and influence at times. They have been fol- 
 lowed by a mob of shallow individuals who have endeavored to 
 spread broadcast their pernicious doctrine. How have they suc- 
 ceeded in their attempt? What impression have they made on 
 humanity? The belief in God is an instinct of our nature. It is 
 inborn. Hence with every individual and every generation the 
 blasphemous warfare has to be begun all over again. Man remains 
 the same. Trumpet a call to the race to rally around the standard 
 of Atheism and how many will answer? Of those who do answer, 
 how many have convictions of any kind? How many wear the 
 livery of spotless lives? How many persevere in their Apostasy? 
 How many die with the cry, " God is not " upon their lips ? There 
 is a dogma of our faith which proclaims that God is, that He is 
 the Creator of the universe, that His existence is not only demon- 
 strated by faith, but is, moreover, demonstrable by reason alone. 
 We are obliged to believe that it is in the power of human reason 
 to prove that God exists. This is a consoling doctrine. It does 
 not mean that you or I can prove by reason the existence of God, 
 but that the proof thereof falls within the domain of human in- 
 telligence. The arguments already proposed would seem to prove 
 that God is. Others may be added. 
 
 I. It may be concluded from the many ideas or principles 
 which prevail throughout humanity. There are the indisputable 
 principles which control every other principle, and without which 
 
 38 
 
THERE IS NO GOD. 39 
 
 knowledge or certainty would be an impossibility. They are called 
 intuitive, necessary, fundamental principles. Whence do they get 
 their imperative necessity? Whence derive they that something 
 which can not be gainsaid, which must be admitted by all minds? 
 I might ask, Whence do they deduce the characteristics of eternity 
 and irrefutability? For they are true, and they are true ever. 
 From the unchangeable nature and essences of things. Whence 
 do these essential properties of all things derive their immutability? 
 Evidently from some immutable intelligence which is boundless 
 and substantial truth, which, in other words, is God, whose nature 
 is the prototype of all that is permanent and unvarying in the uni- 
 verse. 
 
 II. Let us ask whence comes the undisputable difference be- 
 tween good and evil? justice and injustice? the fundamental laws 
 of morality? conscience? Do they depend upon the will of man, 
 upon his good pleasure, upon his caprice? The impossibility of 
 this is patent. What man makes is of short duration. Conscience 
 is everywhere and alwa3-s. It is in man, born with him, not 
 originated by him — in him in spite of his will and in spite of all 
 his efforts to destroy it. Conscience tells of a law, a law connotes 
 a superior. Man is not his own superior. Who is this irrepressible 
 legislator, and what is this enduring law ? Follow the same reason- 
 ing for the ideas of justice and good and wrong and inljustice. 
 Listen to Cicero (Deleg. ii. 4) : " The real and only reason of this 
 law of conscience which forbids and commands is to be found in 
 the incorruptible mind of the Supreme Being. God's existence may 
 explain much in the world. Atheism can explain nothing in any 
 order, whether the material, the intellectual, or the moral. Let us 
 hope, for the sake of these defamers, that for them God's mercy 
 will be above all His works." 
 
XX.— (Bob Can «ot »e Iknowm 
 
 Introduction. — The last refuge of those who deny the existence 
 of a Supreme Being is the proposition that it is impossible for man 
 to know anything about God. So strong is the evidence in favor 
 of this first great truth that, unwilling to shoulder the responsibility 
 of an absolute rejection, they assert that human reason is impotent 
 to discover anything about the Deity. They imply that there may 
 be a God. The atheist says God is not because there is nothing 
 in existence beyond matter and blind force. What this affirma- 
 tion of theirs amounts to may readily be gathered. We call (or 
 rather, he calls himself) the one who refuses to grant the existence 
 of an infinite Creator, an Agnostic. The term explains itself. He 
 builds up his belief on baseless assertions, he strengthens it by 
 abstruse metaphysical discussions on being, the " infinite," re- 
 lations, causes, eflfects, succession, or interdependence, unlimited, 
 of things on each other. Their watchword is that nothing can be 
 known save by experience. Here are some reasons alleged for 
 their doctrine by some in the forefront of their ranks. I am an 
 Agnostic, say they, 
 
 I. Because " you Gnostics or Christians do not prove your 
 assertions." This can be put down as a declaration more easily 
 made than demonstrated. We do not know God and His per- 
 fections with any but a small measure of adequacy because God 
 is infinite, and, therefore, no finite mind can comprehend Him 
 or His attributes. Is there any finite thing, any chemical sub- 
 
 40 
 
GOD CAN NOT BE KNOWN. 41 
 
 stance, say, any planet, any fixed star, any stellar system, any 
 natural force which man has in centuries of scientific investigation 
 and with constantly improving appliances ever thoroughly ex- 
 hausted the knowledge of? How, then, can God be possessed com- 
 pletely by any mental effort? But it is in our power to prove 
 that He exists ; it is in our power to predicate certain perfection of 
 Him. We argue from effect to a first cause, and from the fact 
 that that cause is first and necessary being, we deduce its won- 
 derful perfections. 
 
 n. They are Agnostics, they say, *' Because we do not 
 agree among ourselves." That there is disagreement among the 
 sects is very evident. There are as many doctrines as there are 
 sects. There is no unanimity among them save when they combine 
 to attack the Church of Christ. However, regarding the funda- 
 mental truth of which we are speaking, regarding God's existence, 
 they do not differ. All (Catholics, heretics, schismatics, pagans) 
 proclaim their adherence to the primal doctrine of all religion. All 
 religionists, of whatever stamp, profess that there is a God, and 
 that He is the beginning and end of all things, that He is the 
 Creator and the Ruler of the universe. 
 
 in. The Agnostic furthermore protests that " even if zve proved 
 our doctrine, even if we agreed on all points of doctrine, those 
 tenets would be void and meaningless." To this allegation we 
 reply by question only. Is there no meaning in the doctrine of 
 God's existence? No meaning in His attributes. His goodness, 
 His mercy, His redemption? Is there no meaning in heaven, hell, 
 judgment? If these words are not impregnated with signification, 
 then all language is sound and nothing more. So much vitality 
 
42 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 have all these terms, so persistent are they, so intelligible do they 
 make all human expression, so much faith of heart and mind goes 
 into their use by the sons of men that without them the sum of 
 all that is beautiful and inspiring in human speech would be lost. 
 These words are what they are not because men invented them 
 aimlessly, but because they were the only terms they could find to 
 express the great truths they convey. 
 
XXL— (5o& Can mot »e Itnowtt. 
 
 Introduction. — We have always, on general principles of logic, 
 the right to deny the above assertion and every kindred assertion. 
 In spite of centuries of attack in which every ingenious argument 
 has been put forward, and always at its full value, the efforts of 
 the infidel have never culminated in proof. It will always be the 
 case that atheism will be characterized by denial. The atheistic 
 school is really a negative school. There is no limit to its repudi- 
 ation of accepted truth. There is no truth which, under given cir- 
 cumstances, it will not refuse to admit. If by admitting that two 
 and two make four, they were logically compelled to profess the 
 existence of God, they would deny that arithmetical fact. When 
 we consider how easy one may become a victim of this pernicious 
 doctrine, when we consider how easy it is to lose one's faith by 
 a disregard for its moral obligations, we can not be too much on 
 our guard. Faith is more easily lost than recovered. Yet to one 
 who has gone to the guilty extreme of denying God's existence, 
 and who begins to enter into himself and to behold how far he has 
 wandered from the Father's house, to one upon whose tastes the 
 husks fall, to one in whose breast home yearnings are awakening, 
 there is a path of deliverance always open. There is prayer, there 
 is reflection. As helps to meditation whence light may come and 
 whereby the soul be prepared for the renewal of faith we suggest 
 the following: 
 
 In our efforts to aid them we are to trust not so much to 
 science, reasoning, eloquence, as to prayer, virtue, gentleness. 
 
 43 
 
44 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 I. We must inquire what our patient admits, denies, or doubts. 
 In all cases the process of enlightenment will reveal some ignorance 
 and much contradiction. The infidel will grant and deny without 
 stint. He is to be questioned about the meaning of the terms he 
 uses, about miracle, mystery, and revelation. He must have gently 
 but firmly forced upon him the weakness of the arguments advanced 
 by those in whose footsteps he is walking. Nothing about the moral 
 character of the leaders of incredulity is to be concealed from him. 
 He is to be referred to their biographies. More than anything else, 
 is the insufficiency of these men to be emphasized. What have 
 they done, what can they do in the light of their principles for the 
 individual, the family, the state? What have they done him? Has 
 he been uplifted or plunged into depths from which he is eager 
 to be rescued? Have they made him proud of himself or has he 
 been deceived and humiliated? Let him be shown how their works 
 are full of misrepresentation and of lies, full of calumnies against 
 religion as old as the world. They have been unfair, unjust. They 
 have conspired in their histories against the truth to such a de- 
 gree that their pages are criminal with patent forgeries. They 
 boast of freedom of thought, and yet they have been, mentally, 
 slaves to error and falsehood. They have expelled light from their 
 minds, and lo ! there is nothing therein but darkness. They are not 
 among the best of mankind — not among the benefactors of the race. 
 Had they been the leaders of humanity, how long would mankind 
 have flourished? 
 
 n. How deplorable would be man's condition without belief 
 in God! So necessary is God, that were He not, that one 
 would be the truest benefactor of man who would invent God. 
 Stress is to be laid on the fountains of atheism, pride, lust, moral 
 corruption of any kind, bad logic; in fact, anything which con- 
 
GOD CAN NOT BE KNOWN, 45 
 
 tradicts or threatens or destroys the purity and dignity of man^s 
 body and mind and soul. In this wise, and with God's help, he 
 may be brought to the truth. The more we reflect, the more we 
 become convinced that, of all men, the atheist is the most criminal 
 and the most degraded. His guilt is deicidal. To think of it ! He 
 is unwilling that God should be, God all perfect, but he is satisfied 
 that he, such a pygmy and so full of imperfections and limitations, 
 should possess existence. 
 
XXIL— miraclee Hre Hn HbeurMtij- 
 
 Introduction, — This is another rallying call of infidelity. It is 
 unsupported by truth, however, and is unreasonable in the last 
 degree. It is a pity that there is not a counter cry ever on the lips 
 of those who believe. The Christian should be as strong to pro- 
 claim his doctrine as is the unbeliever. The boast of the atheist 
 would not be so ubiquitous and loud were the believer as brave 
 in his truth as the infidel is valorous in his lie. Our cry should be, 
 " There must be a God." There must be a knowable God. Man 
 is helpless without God, or, to put it in their style, man can not get 
 along without God, he can not be, he can not live, he can not 
 breathe, he can not think without God. He would never be were 
 it not for God. It is really tiresome to have to go over and over 
 again the ground that the defenders of the faith have traveled 
 over and over since the beginning. It is tiresome, yet it must be 
 done. Just as soon as we go behind the walls to rest, immediately 
 swarms of invaders arise as if by magic, and once more the fight 
 is on. To the fling of theirs against miracles our answer is that 
 they are not absurd. They have been and they are every day. 
 
 I. A miracle is not an impossibility. Miracles are denied by 
 those who refuse to admit the existence of God. That they are 
 possible is also rejected by those who believe in God but reject 
 any interference on the part of the Deity in the affairs of creation. 
 All they allege against the miracle is but a tissue of statements 
 without demonstration. We might answer them by stating that 
 miracles are possible, because they have occurred. Apply the his- 
 
 46 
 
MIRACLES ARE AN ABSURDITY, 47 
 
 torical test to any of the stupendous happenings of Christianity — to 
 the resurrection of Christ, let us say. Is there anything more 
 luminously attested in the annals of the world? But the enemies 
 of faith say No ; there was never a resurrection from the dead, be- 
 cause a miracle is an absurdity; that is, something which should 
 neither be spoken of nor listened to by any one claiming to be a 
 reasonable being. What is a miracle? It is an event which can 
 not be brought about by any process of nature, nor by the action 
 of man, or of angels, good or bad. It is just the fact that no natural 
 agent can perform it that makes it possible. We have to ascribe 
 it to God, to whom all things are possible. God can not change 
 the law of nature. Were He to wish to do so, He could. But the 
 miracle does not suppose a change in the laws of nature — ^those so 
 vaunted laws of nature about which scientists know so little — it 
 merely supposes that the action of such or such an agent is for the 
 time suspended. Witness the security of the youths in the fiery 
 furnace. Has not the Deity the same privileges as are granted to 
 any other framer of laws? To what does he, who rejects the pos- 
 sibility of the miracle, reduce the great Creator of the universe? 
 To the position of a grand inert Lama in an Asiatic temple. 
 
 II. Miracles are probable. There is a law of nature, but there 
 is a law of humanity, of love, of providence. Man is to be looked 
 after. There are emotions of his being which must be respected. 
 If there are no such things possible as miracles, then let man never 
 lift up his eyes heavenward, let him never fall on his knees in 
 prayer before God. Let him address himself to the laws of nature. 
 I might say, what is the use (pardon the expression) of God if He 
 can not perform miracles? When there is question of propagating 
 religion the people preached to ask for some wonder, that is, they 
 asked for miracle. The demand for miracles is ubiquitous. The 
 
48 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 farmer asks for rain. The mariner asks for the calming of the 
 tempest. Says St. Thomas equivalently (Contr. Gent. iii. 96) : 
 " All heard prayers are not miracles, but many miracles are heard 
 prayers." We may go a step further and say not only is the 
 miracle possible, not only is it possible, but it is certain. Consult 
 history. 
 
XXIIL— fiiMracle0 are llncrebible^ 
 
 Introduction. — This means that no mind which respects itself 
 can admit miracles. Of this something has been said already. The 
 warfare against God which has been going on since the beginning 
 may take different aspects, but the difference is superficial only. The 
 conflict is waged against God. It has for its aim the extinction in 
 every mind of all thoughts of God ; in every heart of all aspiration 
 toward Him, in all the energy of mankind of every deed which 
 directly or indirectly may acknowledge His existence or His suprem- 
 acy. The campaign proceeds directly by repudiating His being, 
 indirectly by limiting or by affecting to misunderstand His infinite 
 perfection. Take away or diminish in any manner His attributes, 
 and the logical inference is that He is not. We must grant Him 
 infinity in every relation, we must grant Him power, knowledge, 
 goodness, justice, mercy without bounds; otherwise He ceases to 
 be God. Something has already been hinted about miracles, but 
 a few more ideas will usefully find place herein, and, moreover, what 
 we advance about His power may be advanced concerning His 
 knowledge, concerning, in fact, any of His perfections. Again we 
 profess that in the light of reason we can not consistently, a priori, 
 reject miracles. 
 
 I. Miracles are Credible because they are Possible. — It is to be 
 remembered that a miracle is an effect which only God can produce. 
 If there be effects which in themselves seem producible by a finite 
 
 49 
 
so APOLOGETICA. 
 
 cause, there is something in the method of their production which 
 can be ascribed to God only. If miracles are impossible, it is be- 
 cause God is not omnipotent. To deny infinite power to God is to 
 deny His infinite nature — it is to hem Him in with obstacles or 
 limits. He can not be hemmed in by His own nature, which is 
 boundless. He can not be impeded by one above Him. No one is 
 above Him. Certainly He can not be shackled by any one beneath 
 Him. H He can not produce an effect beyond the forces of nature, 
 beyond the entire forces of entire nature, if He can not suspend 
 the laws of nature, if He can not act against those laws, it is because 
 He is dependent upon those laws. This idea must be rejected, for 
 He is the framer of these laws, and they are His to dispense with as 
 He deems fit. Grant that some hitherto undreamed of miracle were 
 performed, an occurrence divinely ordered whereby a change would 
 be introduced into the order of things, we ask. Is the present the only 
 order possible? We ask. Is not God Master, and is it not in His 
 power to change even the very order of things, and while so doing, 
 counteract all evil consequences ? Moreover, what we understand as 
 evil consequences may in some higher plane be harmony ineffable. 
 
 II. A God who reveals truth must mark His revelation, which 
 is His official declaration to His creation, with some unmistakable 
 stamp. The seal which will gain universal credence more easily 
 is the miracle of deed or the miracle of word which we call prophecy, 
 and which is the certain announcement of a fact to take place in 
 the future, a fact which can not naturally be known in the present. 
 It is a prediction, not a guess, not a conjecture. It is in the order 
 of miracles and generally communicates supernatural facts. It is 
 not made at random. It is always solemn. It is evident that 
 prophecy proceeds from the spirit of God only. It can be ascribed 
 
MIRACLES ARE INCREDIBLE. 51 
 
 to Him only who possesses the whole domain of truth. In all 
 times and among all peoples prophecy has been considered as a 
 communication from the Holy Spirit, and is an infallible mark of 
 the intervention of the Deity. Miracle and prophecy are both within 
 the perfection of God — for He is all powerful and He knows all 
 things. 
 
XXIV.— fiDpeterlee are Tllnwortb)? of tbe 
 Ibuman flDlnb* 
 
 Introduction. — This assertion is at the bottom of all the assertions 
 against revealed truth, because fundamentally in the intellectual 
 order, man's pride is hurt, for that he can not understand and hence, 
 in his unreasonable indignation, he does not blame his own finiteness, 
 but the vast cycle of verity which lies beyond his comprehension. 
 There should be no mysteries for him. Everything should float 
 within his mental ken and nothing should be outside the grasp of his 
 intelligence. It is the drop of water that clamors to be a sea. It 
 is the glow worm which wishes to be a star. Still, more deep yet, is 
 the reason that he wishes to find some excuse for wandering at his 
 own free will among forbidden pastures. Give me something that 
 I can understand, and I will surrender. This is his protest, flat, un- 
 profitable, stale. Very little consolation in this attitude. The proper 
 disposition of the human mind is merely to accept without under- 
 standing what is proposed by an infinite intelligence through an 
 infallible teacher. 
 
 I. What is a mystery? It is a supernatural truth or fact. It 
 can neither be understood nor disproved by human reason. It con- 
 tradicts no law of the understanding. Even the German rationalist, 
 Goethe, insists that the intelligence of man and the intelligence of 
 God are two very different things. To deny the possibility of the 
 mystery, to deny that mystery exists, is to elevate the limited mind 
 of man to a level with the boundless mind of God. To deny that 
 God can reveal a mystery is to deny conscious life and free will to 
 
 !i2 
 
MYSTERIES UNWORTHY OF HUMAN MIND. 53 
 
 the Divinity. Man can not arrive at a clear and adequate idea of 
 the essence of God and of His attributes. How many varieties, 
 therefore, in the very being of God which, soar as he may, he can not 
 find? These are the mysteries. Without revelation there are facts 
 and truths which man would never think of, much less understand. 
 It must never be forgotten that man only perceives truth, and so, 
 since the expanse of truth is limitless, since God is substantial 
 truth, mystery is not only a possibility but an actuality, a necessity, 
 n. There are mysteries everywhere, and we admit them. Has 
 the naturalist penetrated the intimate nature of any body? How 
 much is known about forces? About life? About death? We 
 may know the mechanism of a watch, because man has made it. 
 Man may dissect a corpse — can he revive it? There is mystery in 
 the grain of sand on the ocean's margin, mystery in the drop of 
 water, in the flower, in the tree, in the small insect, in the largest 
 animal, in man. No man possesses complete knowledge of any one 
 thing. The scientist has imprisoned light and electricity; does he 
 adequately comprehend a ray of the one or a spark of the other? 
 Does he understand the human eye, the human soul? The atheist 
 denies God because he can not understand the existence of a being 
 eternal and everywhere present, but is not a universe without a God 
 an enigma still more inexplicable? The Pantheist denies creation 
 because he can not conceive of a world coming from nothing, but 
 is it not as difficult to believe in the world as an emanation from God 
 as a finite being infinite? So it is for the professions that reject 
 mystery. They refuse to admit one mysterious truth, and they 
 throw themselves into the arms of a thousand incomprehensibilities. 
 There is no contradiction implied in the mystery. In the Trinity 
 there would be an absurdity were we called upon to admit the ex- 
 istence of one God and of three Gods. No! Revealed mysteries 
 
54 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 are the landmarks of truth. They keep the human mind within 
 bounds. In their light — if I may use the word while speaking of 
 mysteries — the human mind will be prevented from going astray 
 in its conclusions. Moreover, they dignify man's intelligence. No 
 humiliation in bowing down to them in willing surrender. On the 
 contrary, one bends to a royal Master, and one rises ennobled, and 
 with the light that illumineth upon one. 
 
XXV.— (5oi) Docs *lot Care for tbe Morl^ 
 
 Introduction. — Theism and Deism are radically the same words, 
 but there may be a distinction drawn between them. Theists, as 
 we are at liberty to conclude from their writings, maintain the ex- 
 istence of a Deity who governs all things by the constant exercise 
 of His beneficent power; Deists admit the existence of a God who 
 created all things, but affirm that, having laid down immutable laws 
 for their government. He does not further interfere. The declaration 
 that God does not care for the world implies that it is of no service 
 whatever to refer to the great Ruler ; that His solicitude ceased with « 
 the termination of His creative act, and that men and women are 
 mere crawling things on the surface of His footstool, and whether 
 they come or go, live or die, are happy or unhappy, is a matter of 
 complete indifference to Him. It is hard to conceive anything 
 more blasphemous than this. It is cruel to man, it is unjust to God. 
 As well might God not be as to show no concern for His creatures. 
 It is simply a denial of Providence. 
 
 I. What is Providence f It is forethought on the part of God. 
 It expresses His never ceasing power exerted in and over all His 
 works. It is the opposite of " chance," " fortune," " luck." We may 
 call it a continuance of creation. In relation to all things it is uni- 
 versal, and nothing is too minute for its regard. For moral beings 
 it is special. Each object is watched over by Providence according 
 to its capacity. God's providence is concerned in a sparrow's fall. 
 
 55 
 
56 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 His children are of more value than many sparrows, and so are 
 assured of His providential care in all their concerns. Its acts are 
 threefold: preservation, cooperation, and government. He controls 
 all things for the highest good of the whole, acting upon every 
 species according to its nature; inanimate things by physical in- 
 fluences, brutes by instinct and free agents, according to the laws of 
 free agency. Providence displays God's omnipresence, holiness, jus- 
 tice, benevolence. If the telescope reveals the immense magnitude 
 and countless hosts of worlds which He created and sustains, the 
 microscope shows that His providence equally concerns itself with 
 the minutest animalcule. Nothing is really small with God. He hangs 
 the most momentous weights on little wires. We have quoted from 
 a non-Catholic source (Fausset) because it describes clearly the 
 philosophical notion of providence, and without a proper under- 
 standing of the same it is impossible to explain satisfactorily to our- 
 selves the objections which in the eyes of many militate against this 
 wonderful and adorable attribute of the Divinity. In favor of provi- 
 dence we may advance general proofs. 
 
 II. There must he a Providence. God must have a care for His 
 world. What would the absence of providence argue in the Deity? 
 It would accuse the Supreme Being of cruelty. It would imply that 
 the material and animal worlds are dearer to Him than the world 
 of man. For it is chiefly that God does not take care of man which 
 originates this implied censure of God's providence. It would mean 
 that God's attributes of omniscience (which has been called the eye 
 of providence), of mercy, and justice are nothing but limited vision, 
 pitilessness, injustice. It would deny His power. His wisdom. His 
 holiness. In a general way it would reduce the God of the universe 
 to a blind, feelingless entity. It would afford an excuse for man to 
 
GOD DOES NOT CARE EOR THE WORLD. 57 
 
 listen to every voice of passion and make him curse the day he came 
 into existence. There is no crime which would not follow in the 
 wake of this misconception of divine providence. This is only a 
 general argument. Yet, general as it is, it forces conviction. It 
 drives us to the dilemma, either God is provident or He does not 
 exist at all. 
 
XXVL— (Bob Doee IRot Care for tbe Morl^ 
 
 Introduction. — Probably there is no cry goes up to heaven so fre- 
 quently as this cry of the discontented. The world is largely made 
 up of the discontented. They are found in every situation of ex- 
 istence. They are not confined to the poor and suffering alone. 
 The clamor of discontent frequently rises from the hearts of the 
 well and the prosperous. Here we have a proof that perfect happi- 
 ness is not found here below. It is evidence that nothing on this 
 earth can make a man supremely happy. It is well to understand 
 that flawless happiness is not of this world. Man may be contented 
 here always; happy, in the true sense of the word, never. Man is 
 not made for this world. Man is made for God, and until he obtains 
 possession of God his heart-hunger will never be appeased. It is 
 the losing sight of this great truth which makes man dissatisfied, 
 begets misunderstanding and fills this world with unreasonable re- 
 criminations against Providence. As soon as man realizes this 
 important verity, he will begin to understand, in some small degree, 
 at least, the ways of God in His dealings with man. Man complains 
 of the physical evils which he encounters on his journey through 
 life, but 
 
 I. Physical evils are no arguments against providence. By 
 physical ills we understand the calamities which visit mankind. We 
 understand the three great evils of the world, war, pestilence, famme, 
 and everything which follows in their wake. This is why, according 
 to Lactantius 1. c. c. 13, epicures denied that the Deity exercised 
 providence toward His creatures. Says St. Augustine, " We refrain 
 from censuring the workman in his workshop, but we are not afraid 
 
 58 
 
GOD DOES NOT CARE FOR THE WORLD. 59 
 
 to blame God in his world." An unskilled man entering a workshop 
 sees many tools of which he does not understand the nature and the 
 use. Perhaps he may even go to the extreme of considering them 
 as superfluous. In handling them he may wound himself; then he 
 cries out against them as harmful. So in the world, says the same 
 doctor, men reprehend God, the creator and the administrator of all 
 things, because they liehold causes in action, causes of the nature 
 and tendency of which they have not the slightest knowledge. Man, 
 hence, instead of censuring, should profess his ignorance, and wonder 
 and adore. Alan, in presence of physical evils, should remember that 
 a careful ruler must look out for the general good ; should remem- 
 ber that in all things care for the universal weal must at times bring 
 about private inconvenience and damage. Man should not forget 
 that the perfection of the universe calls for veracity. He should 
 not forget that what displeases him may bring pleasure to others. 
 Therefore, unless he wishes to lay himself open to being considered 
 ignorant and selfish, he must remain silent in presence of the hap- 
 penings in the universe. 
 
 II. Faith proves that there is a providence^ and that God does 
 take care of the world. When we open the eyes of our faith, provi- 
 dence is immediately vindicated. Our faith teaches us that all 
 these evils are consequences of man's first disobedience, and hence 
 are to be ascribed not to God, but to our first parents. They may 
 reasonably be considered as the penalty of actual transgression. They 
 are, besides, the occasion of satisfying and of meriting. They are, 
 moreover, a wholesome stimulus in the formation of character, and 
 they keep our hearts uplifted toward that home for which we are 
 all destined. These considerations are based upon faith, but they 
 are also built up on that great primal prevarication which, while it 
 is a religious dogma, is at the same time a fact historically attested. 
 
xxviL— (Bob Does mot Care for tbe movio. 
 
 Introduction. — This libel on the perfections of the Divinity is an 
 emanation rather from a morbid disposition than from a well 
 balanced mind. Even among the pagans, whose conception of God 
 were so blurred by egotism and prejudice, were found philosophers 
 who, following the dictates of reason alone, argued wisely and con- 
 vincingly in favor of the important fact that God does not abandon 
 His creatures. They listened to and they were familiar with the 
 complaints of querulous, shortsighted men; they heard the clamors 
 that incessantly rose about them — clamors accusing the Deity of 
 partiality and unwisdom in dealing with the human race. On all 
 sides their ears were assailed by the cry that the wicked prospered 
 while the good were plunged into the depths of all sorts of ad- 
 versity. We may hear the ululations of David, " My steps had well 
 nigh slipped . . . seeing the prosperity of the wicked" (Ps. 
 Ixxii. 2), and of Job, " Why, then, do the wicked live, are they ad- 
 vanced and strengthened with riches?" (Job xxi. 7) ; and of Jere- 
 miah, " Why is it well with all of them that transgress and do 
 wickedly?" (Jer. xii. i). This is one form which the allegations 
 against Providence take. 
 
 I. But there is a Providence. These reproaches are exaggerated, 
 for not all the wicked abound in the things of this world, nor are 
 all the deserving deprived of them. Besides, there is no account 
 taken of the other good things which the virtuous enjoy. Reputa- 
 tion, for example, health, worthy children, peace of mind, and 
 
 60 
 
GOD DOES NOT CARE FOR THE WORLD. 6i 
 
 resignation. These things are more than compensation. Again, 
 evil doers are not happy. They alone know the mental tortures 
 which are theirs — remorse, fear, suspicion, envy, jealousy, and the 
 like, so many spectres that render unbearable the banquet of de- 
 lights which seems to be their share. Moreover, none of these ex- 
 ceptions taken against Providence are of any weight save to those 
 who believe (?) that the grave is the end of the whole man, that 
 consciousness extinct on this side is not reawakened beyond. But 
 for those who know that there is perfect felicity for them some- 
 where, though not in this world, all the calamities of existence are 
 as nothing. To quote St. Augustine : " These ills are profitable, 
 when piously borne. They diminish wrong doing, they try virtue, 
 they demonstrate the vanity of existence, and they awaken a desire 
 for the quick coming of that kingdom wherein alone beatitude is real 
 and perpetual." 
 
 II. Our authoritative teachers explain the reason or advance the 
 reasons of this inequality of distribution in the matter of the good 
 things of earth. St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei) : " Were God to 
 punish now all manifest sins, nothing would be reserved for the 
 last judgment. If He punished no sin here, His providence would 
 be discredited." So in things of secondary importance. If God 
 did not bestow them on some abundantly, we might be inclined to 
 say that He was not Master of them. Likewise, if He gave to all 
 who asked, we might conclude that He was to be obeyed simply 
 on account of these gifts — an idea which, instead of rendering us 
 pious servants, would fill us with cupidity and avarice. It is to 
 be kept in mind that the verdict of the holy fathers in matters of 
 religious truth was not based upon revelation only. They were 
 men who met and faced honestly all the difficulties which the op- 
 
62 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 ponents of religion brought to bear against truth. Hence they 
 answered as the occasion demanded. They met revelation with 
 revelation, authority with authority, Scripture with Scripture, and 
 reason with reason. When we quote them here we quote them for 
 the value of the reasons they furnish forth. 
 
XXVIIL— (Bob 2>oes mot Care for Ibis Morlb. 
 
 Introduction. — In dealing with the Creator in His acts toward 
 mankind there are two facts which should not be lost sight of. 
 These two facts are the free will of God and the free will of His 
 rational creatures. The Lord is Master, and His sway supreme. 
 Whatever He wills we must submit to without repining. This 
 resignation is demanded of us by the very nature of the revelation 
 which exists between Him and us. His reason for all His opera- 
 tions lies in this one assertion of His, " I am the Lord, thy God." 
 Sometimes we may be able to understand the why and the wherefore 
 of His performances. Sometimes they are too deep for our fathom- 
 ing. In either case ours only to listen and follow. Besides the free 
 will of the Deity and His power over all the works of His hands, 
 there is a negative attitude of God in the affairs of the race. He 
 does not will. He concurs physically, it is true, but He simply 
 does not check. He permits. This brings us to the second fact 
 that many occurrences are attributable only indirectly to God and 
 directly to man. Yet is the providence of God so manifest that out 
 of evil He produces good. 
 
 I. The holy fathers are strenuous advocates of God's providence. 
 The reasons advanced by St. John Chrysostom for the unequal dis- 
 tribution of temporal benefits are cogent. He affects the saints, lest 
 they be puffed up ; that they may not have an overweening opinion 
 of themselves; that others may not esteem them too highly; that 
 
 63 
 
64 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 the power of God may be evidenced in their regard ; and that their 
 labors for the salvation of others may be more fruitful. The just 
 suffer in order that their patience may shine in a dark world, that 
 their thoughts and the thoughts of others may be lifted up beyond 
 this sphere, in order that their mode of life may run in ordinary 
 grooves, and that this example may not be pitched too high for 
 others to follow. 
 
 Let us add to these reasons, which certainly go far toward proving 
 that in all that God does or allows He is exercising a care over 
 the members of the human family, let us add that even if we look 
 at suffering in the light of punishment and at prosperity in the 
 light of reward, it is, nevertheless, true that no one is so utterly 
 abandoned that he has never done a good deed, and no one so per- 
 fect as never to have been guilty of some transgression. God is so 
 just that He never forgets to reward, as He never is unmindful 
 of the sanction which attaches to all His laws. 
 
 n. History vindicates providence. That masterpiece of all time, 
 '" The City of God," by St. Augustine, and all the philosophers of 
 history written in a fair spirit, make clear to all who read the in- 
 tervention for good of God in the affairs of the world. Looking 
 upon Scripture as the authenticated chronicle which it is, we find 
 that the histories of Israel and of Gentile nations show that right- 
 eousness exalteth a nation. The preparations made for the coming 
 of Christ, the distinct prophecies, the saving of the sacred Scrip- 
 tures, the fate of the Roman Empire, the multiplication and dis- 
 persion of the Jews, all the many events narrated of private indi- 
 viduals or nations in the Bible — all this and more makes us realize 
 that the very hairs of our head are numbered, that not one is for- 
 gotten among countless multitudes, that God upholdeth all things 
 
GOD CARES NOT FOR HIS WORLD. 65 
 
 by the word of His power, that by Him all things consist, and that 
 the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men. There are mysteries 
 undoubtedly connected with special acts of divine providence. It 
 must be so, for His providence, like all His attributes, is infinite. We 
 may trust God, for 
 
 "All discord (is) harmony not understood, 
 All partial evil (is) universal good." 
 
XXIX.— (Bob dates mot for Ibis Morlb. 
 
 Introduction. — The more we study the affairs of Hfe in connection 
 with the Creator, the more we become convinced that the Lord 
 is not a meddler, but a guardian. He meddles not, because He re- 
 spects the great gift He has bestowed upon His creatures, the great 
 gift of free will. He has not made men automata. He has endowed 
 them with the liberty of action. He created them without consult- 
 ing them ; but once created. He leaves them to work their way un- 
 hampered toward the glorious end for which He gave them being. 
 We have, therefore, to take into consideration the end of creation. 
 Providence implies practically an act of intelligence which grasps 
 the ends and the means thereunto, and involves an act of the will 
 which approves of those means and decrees that the end must be 
 attained. We may call the execution of this decree God's governance 
 of the world. This providence divine has been attacked in divers 
 ways. Among its opponents, besides materialists and epicureans, 
 evolutionists of the Darwin and Spencer type are found. Against 
 them we may file this proposition: 
 
 I. God protects all His creatures, and in a special way man, by 
 His ineifahle providence, and leads and helps them toward their 
 destiny. He can do so because He is infinitely powerful. He 
 must do so because He is all wise. He does and will do so because 
 He is boundless goodness. His power controls all things. His 
 wisdom directs all things. His goodness safeguards all things, and 
 through it His will is sincere in its determination to consummate 
 all things according to the end prescribed by their nature. As man 
 is the most precious of His creatures, it goes without saying that 
 
 66 
 
GOD CARES NOT FOR HIS WORLD. 67 
 
 over him He exercises a special watchfulness. It really matters not 
 what happens to man, provided within his reach are placed the 
 means to help him toward the purpose for which he has been given 
 existence. Man by unaided reason is able to discover that God 
 exists, that his soul is to endure beyond this life, that by the pos- 
 session of God alone will he be made happy, that this beatitude will 
 consist in knowing, praising, and loving God, that God can be pos- 
 sessed only by those who love Him in this life and exhibit that love 
 by observing the natural law according to their lights, by observ- 
 ing also other laws which are known to have been promulgated 
 directly or indirectly by Heaven, and by migrating from this world 
 in a state of friendship with the Creator. 
 
 n. That God supplies these means in sufficiency is beyond all 
 question. It is a conclusion deducible from the most superficial 
 consideration of the divine perfections. Some of these means are 
 furnished by all created things, all of which are placed in this world 
 as helps to man. Where revelation is unknown, God will grant this 
 sufficience either by external assistance or, if necessary, by illuming 
 the intelligence and moving thereby the will. What man in this 
 regard is unable to acquire the knowledge of by himself he is gen- 
 erally in a position to learn of others. Even by the very calamities 
 which enter into his experience, and which tempt him at times to 
 blame Providence, even by these may he be enabled to read the 
 happy consummation for which he is intended. In the eternities 
 it will be part of our enlightenment to understand that the very oc- 
 currences which made us most inclined to doubt God's providence 
 were the very happenings that vindicated God*s love for us and the 
 securest means of putting it in our power to achieve a glorious im- 
 mortality. " Although he should kill me, I will trust in him " (Job 
 xiii. 15). 
 
XXX.— (Bob Ibae mo Care for Ms Morlb. 
 
 Introduction. — The clamor that God is an improvident Master is 
 louder and more frequent than any other against the Deity. The 
 accusation is far-reaching and assumes divers forms. He does not 
 exist, it is said, or, if He does, He shows no concern in the affairs 
 of His world. This is, they urge, true not only in matters temporal, 
 but in spiritual as well. Some men are more highly favored than 
 others, even where there is question of the interests of men's souls. 
 Salvation, they allege, is not within the reach of all. There are men, 
 and not a few, who pass through life without a single chance of sav- 
 ing their souls being offered them. This is a calumny and a blas- 
 phemy. Moreover, it directly antagonizes the perfections as well as 
 the existence of God. We must concede in the first place that, 
 
 I. God sincerely wishes the salvation of all men. The contra- 
 dictory of this thesis has been held by Calvinists and Jansenists. The 
 Church, through the Council of Trent, utters this doctrine : " If any 
 one affirms that the grace of justification is granted to the predestined 
 only, and that the rest of mankind are called but receive no grace 
 because they are predestined to evil " (A. S.). Without opening the 
 door which leads to the thorny mazes of the mystery of predestination, 
 our reason compels us to admit that God is infinitely good and in- 
 finitely powerful, that He wishes all to be saved, that He gives all the 
 means, and that it is within the domain of His omnipotence and good- 
 ness to desire and to be able to do this. There is only one obstacle 
 which prevents the effect of His assistance, and that obstacle is the 
 impediment which is opposed to the divine action by the free will of 
 
 68 
 
GOD HAS NO CARE FOR HIS WORLD. 69 
 
 man. From the consideration of the goodness of God and of His 
 justice, we are justified in concluding that no man who has reached 
 the age of reason will, in the moment of judgment, be able to excuse 
 himself for his misdemeanors and his plight with the plea that he 
 never had the wherewithal to act differently in life. God could not 
 condemn a man truthfully putting forth such justification of his 
 conduct. 
 
 II. God amply provides for man's eternal welfare. This can not 
 be denied in its application to those who are the disciples of Christ. 
 " And this is the will of my Father that sent me : that every one who 
 seeth the Son and believeth in him may have life everlasting " (John 
 vi. 40). " For God so loved the world as to give his only begotten 
 Son" (John iii. 16). There can be no doubt, therefore, of God's 
 earnest will to save all those who believe in His Son and abide by 
 His teachings. That God sincerely desired the salvation of the Jews 
 is expressed by the words of Christ (Matt, xxiii. 37) : "Jerusalem, 
 Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them that are 
 sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered together thy chil- 
 dren, as the hen doth gather her chickens under her wings, and thou 
 wouldst not ? " This plaint of the Saviour, and the wonderful de- 
 liverance of the Jews from bondage, and the long line of prophets 
 appealing through doctrine and miracle — all this proves luminously 
 God's paternal watchfulness over the chosen people. That over them 
 yet, and over all other divisions of the human family, the same 
 fatherly care is extended, not so largely, but always sufficiently, will 
 be apparent from later considerations. The little that has been said 
 makes it evident that it is impossible in any rational conception of the 
 Deity to exclude providential action over all beings in all things, and 
 especially in things that appertain to the welfare of immortal souls. 
 Let us bear in mind two things. If ever a man is lost, he is lost 
 
70 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 through his own fault. Deliberately he has wrought his own un- 
 doing. " And thou wouldst not/' said Our Lord, speaking of the 
 Jews* rejection of His mission. God, the Supreme Judge, will be 
 within the right of His justice to say to every condemned man, 
 " And thou wouldst not." Besides, what have those who assert that 
 God's providence does not stretch itself over every adult soul to 
 base their claim upon? The consummation of divine justice is be- 
 yond the grave. No traveler has returned to tell mankind the story. 
 The " Beyond " is luminous in itself, but not to us sojourners. I 
 know not what man has been condemned. The salvation of any 
 individual or his reprobation is outside of the horizons which limit 
 my vision. I know what each one must do to reach eternal happi- 
 ness. Here I will never know whether after death he has met with 
 failure or success. Of all who have gone to God, I can not affirm of 
 a single one that he is lost. A consoling truth this, but awful is the 
 fact that out of that innumerable multitude I am only sure that the 
 canonized saints are in the halls of the blessed. As a corrective of 
 this uncertainty I have the certainty that God's mercy is above all His 
 works. 
 
XXXI. -(5o& Ibas iRo Care for 1bi0 Morlb. 
 
 Introduction. — The fountain of all spiritual evil, yea, and in a 
 measure, of much physical evil, is the free will of the creature. In 
 other words, man, not God, is to blame for all the immorality (we 
 use this term according to its primitive meaning) existing among 
 men. Immorality in its first sense signifies thoughts, words, and 
 actions which are vicious, which are contrary to natural law and 
 order. In the material order many of the happenings which are 
 characterized as injurious, as impending physical comfort and wel- 
 fare, might be traced to culpable negligence, and, therefore, are to 
 be imputed to the voluntary agency of man. That God wishes the 
 spiritual weal of the race is outside of all cavil. What we must 
 always reckon with is man's cooperation or want of cooperation. 
 It is a leading and established truth in ethics that though God's pur- 
 pose, or rather will, in the question here submitted is genuine, real, 
 sincere, yet it is not absolute; it is conditioned. God, by the very 
 nature of things, wills man to be saved, only provided he surrenders 
 to the divine assistance, which theologians call grace, and provided, 
 that is, that he makes use of the helps proffered, and thus perseveres 
 in rectitude. This is the correct statement of the nature of the 
 " Salvific " will of God. Of course, there are : 
 
 I. Objections. God is the cause of moral evil. Te this statement 
 we make answer by asking. In what way is He the cause? Is He 
 directly or indirectly the cause? If we are told that He is directly 
 the cause of sin, then God, who is substantial and infinite perfection, 
 acts contrary to His nature, which supposition is absurd, because it 
 
 71 
 
72 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 involves a contradiction, and blasphemous, because it pushes irrever- 
 ence against the divine attributes to the pitch of impious abuse. Sin 
 proceeds directly from the will of the sinner. That God gave man 
 his free will does not make human transgressions imputable to the 
 Divinity. Did moral evil spring from a blind instinct, then we would 
 be compelled in reason to hold the author of that irresistible inclina- 
 tion responsible for it. Surely we are not willing to go to the length of 
 demanding that the Creator should not have endowed His highest 
 handiwork with a power as fruitful in good as in wrong doing. If I 
 am deprived of my will in its native integrity, then perforce must I 
 lose my reason. Without reason and free will, what would I be? 
 A mere animal — an automaton. Praised be our Maker, who loved us 
 more wisely and better than that ! God wishes the existence of the 
 will, but moral evil proceeds therefrom, not necessarily, but from the 
 deHberate misuse of freedom. Evil acts happen independently of 
 God's will. They are not, can not be intended by God. But, 
 
 II. God does not prevent sin. This involves the previous objection. 
 It is identical. It is framed differently. It is not repugnant to the 
 divine attributes that, in this way, in the way we have just explained, 
 there be actions which are wrong. God's purpose in bestowing 
 freedom of action upon man is of the highest and in thorough har- 
 mony with His ineffable perfections. That purpose was eternal happi- 
 ness for man and glory for Himself. Man free, and only as free, has 
 it within his power to practise virtue, to keep in the strait path, 
 to exercise heroic deeds, to master himself, to Hve the only life 
 worth living, to go through this existence unspotted, and thereby 
 glorify his Creator and enjoy consummate bliss. Furthermore, even 
 out of sin may glory ascend to God. God by pardoning sin manifests 
 the glory of His mercy ; by punishing sin, manifests the glory of His 
 justice ; by forbidding sin, manifests the splendor of His sanctity. 
 
XXXII.— (Bob lEyerciece IRo provibence ®ver 
 
 Introduction. — The Church of Christ has made many enemies for 
 itself. They are of such a stripe that their hostility is an honor 
 rather than a reproach. We love Mother Church for the enemies 
 she has made. She brings to men doctrines which by their very 
 nature call for the exercise of duty under circumstances which do 
 not pamper, but are repugnant to human nature. The entire round 
 of Christian obligations is summed up in the words of St. Paul: 
 " For the grace of God our Saviour hath appeared to all men, 
 instructing us that, denying ungodliness and worldly desires, we 
 should live soberly, and justly, and piously" (Titus ii. ii, 12). 
 Adhesion to the faith demands submission both of mind and will. 
 This surrender implies so much self-repression that man revolts, and 
 his rebellion is not against himself, but against his divinely appointed 
 teacher. Hence fault-finding. Hence accusations and calumnies and 
 attacks against doctrine. Hence every truth promulgated finds an 
 opponent. Infidelity has its birth not in the highest, but in the lowest 
 levels of man's being. Divine providence in one way or another is 
 perhaps the chief target of our adversaries. 
 
 I. God does exercise a providence over men in all things and over 
 spiritual concerns in a special manner. Providence is inseparable 
 from Deity. Yet we are asked how is it that if the Church be the one 
 teacher of mankind, how is it that its voice has not been heard by all ? 
 How is it so many have never known the Church, in fact, could 
 
 73 
 
74 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 never have known the Church? This question states an incontro- 
 vertible fact. Yet the fact does not militate against providence, nor 
 against any of its attributes. It would undoubtedly be an unanswer- 
 able objection were men so circumstanced in the impossibility of sav- 
 ing their souls. But they are not. There is no damnation where 
 there is no fault, and there is no fault where the liberty and the 
 power of acting do not exist. The individuals referred to had no 
 chance of having the Gospel preached to them. Their paganism 
 may not be voluntary, and hence the sin of ignorance of God and 
 of idolatry could not be imputed to them. They will not be lost for 
 not having heard the Gospel. So the Church condemned the proposi- 
 tion of Bains, who asserted that " negative infidelity in those to whom 
 Christ has not been preached is a sin.'' Who the more liberal, the 
 Church or the heretic? We must pause here to praise the Church, 
 which has never ceased to protect the rights of reason and humanity. 
 
 II. We are forced to conclude that God must have in all times 
 and places delivered to all men the means to escape perdition. At all 
 times, we say, and in all places, and to all men from the beginning 
 of the world. This we know in general. How the means of salva- 
 tion were afforded in all cases we do not pretend to know. Suffice 
 it for us to have the certainty that the Lord has looked after the 
 eternal interests of man since the beginning, and that every man has 
 been judged by his lights, and rewarded or punished accordingly. 
 God has promulgated two laws — one written, the other unwritten, 
 or, better, the other pencilled on the heart of every man. This latter 
 is known to every rational being. It is called the natural law. It is 
 the reflection of the divine law in the mind of man. It is immutable. 
 Its general precepts or dictates are known to each individual, and in 
 this respect no man can plead invincible ignorance. There has been 
 
NO PROVIDENCE OVER WORLD, 75 
 
 no member of the human family, and there never will be one, into 
 whose intelligence some shining of this law has not entered. Accord- 
 ing to this law and according to the measure of their knowledge of 
 this law will the men be judged to whom Christ has never been 
 preached. With this explanation even the simplest may understand 
 that God's providence is as ubiquitous as His presence. 
 
XXXIII.— (5o& Us *mnsoacltou0 Jfor Soula. 
 
 Introduction. — The Catholic Church, as the accredited teacher in 
 matters of faith and morals, besides being thoroughly equipped for 
 her mission, possesses all the qualifications and is endowed with all 
 the characteristics which are essential to such teachership. Like the 
 truth which she delivers and protects, her pronouncements are clear, 
 unhesitating and consistent. Consistency is her jewel. She shrinks 
 from no legitimate consequence of her averments. She stands by all 
 logical inferences deducible from her dogmas. This is noticeable 
 always, and not least in the matter before us. Advocating the exist- 
 ence of a God, of whom we affirm a benign and impartial providence, 
 we assert that to every man God furnishes a chance of salvation. 
 Including within the zone of that providence even those to whom the 
 God of the Christians has never been preached, we are immediately 
 and almost triumphantly met by the objection : " But according to the 
 Church there is no salvation without Baptism, a sacrament which 
 most assuredly is out of the question with regard to peoples who have 
 never heard of Christ or his Church." They consider this a dilemma 
 on one or other horn of which the propounder of Catholic doctrine 
 must find himself impaled. Let us listen to the explanation of the 
 Church. 
 
 I. Baptism is necessary for salvation. When we say that Baptism 
 •s necessary, we mean that it is an indispensable means to salvation. 
 In other words, without Baptism no one can be saved. This is cer- 
 tainly making our statement as strong as possible. However, this 
 
 76 
 
GOD IS UNSOLICITOUS FOR SOULS. 77 
 
 necessity is not so absolute as not to suffer some exception, not in the 
 matter of the effects produced by the sacrament — these are always 
 rigorously exacted — but in the matter of the rite or administration of 
 Baptism. In other words, there arc more ways than one of receiving 
 this sacrament. In adults, i. e., in those who have reached the years 
 of reason, the effects of Baptism may be supplied by an act of con- 
 trition made perfect by charity. This act includes the desire for the 
 sacrament, and this desire will supply for the absence of the rite. 
 There is a baptism of water, of fire, of blood. The first is Baptism 
 as it is ordinarily administered. The second is the fruit of perfect 
 contrition coupled with the desire or purpose to receive the sacrament. 
 The third is martyrdom, or the dying for the faith of it (Acts i. 5, 
 Mark x. 39). 
 
 II. This teaching of the Church with regard to the Baptism of 
 desire is not an innovation, nor is it a loophole. It is based on the 
 authority of Scripture, and is corroborated by the testimony of the 
 fathers. Says St. Augustine : " This baptism is as of much avail 
 for the remission of sin as if the individual had been washed in the 
 waters of fontal baptism." How does this meet the difficulty relative 
 to those who are beyond the knowledge of Baptism and its necessity ? 
 Simply because it shows us a way opened by Providence which 
 all men may follow to salvation. God works in wondrous ways and 
 the acts of His love can not be numbered by the sands of the sea. To 
 all outside of Christendom He gives light, more or less, but always 
 sufficiently abundant, to see the path of rectitude. Every man knows 
 the general principle of morality, which is that good must be done, 
 evil must be avoided. Adhesion to this principle, no matter how 
 many or how heinous mistakes are made, renders the man upright 
 in intent, which is the only thing God considers. This uprightness 
 
78 APOLOGETtCA. 
 
 must have its reward. If Sacramental Baptism can not be secured, 
 then providence in God's own mysterious way will come to the rescue. 
 St. Thomas says that God will deny nothing to the man who does 
 all he can. This is only reasonable. If there is no other way out of 
 it, He will provide even to the limit of miracle. The Spirit of God 
 worketh incessantly, and what is to hinder the human soul from 
 being touched to love and contrition and the desire for the regenerat- 
 ing laver? No one knows how many may be lost who were held in 
 loving arms over the baptismal font. Neither does any one know 
 how many are saved whose infancy was passed in barbarism and 
 who waxed into manhood and old age amid the excesses of the 
 wildest savagery. . 
 
XXXIV.— (Bob 110 mot Solicitous for Souls. 
 
 Introduction. — The consistency with which truth is always garbed 
 is evidenced in every doctrine of the Church from its widest general- 
 ization down to its most particular application. It is this consistency 
 which is a distinguishable element in the beautiful harmony which 
 is so characteristic of all Catholic teaching. Mistress of the whole 
 domain of moral and dogmatic facts, she is unafraid of any of the 
 consequences of her utterances. Along with this established preroga- 
 tive is seen the benignity of her universal sway. Noble, all her man- 
 dates are elevating. Infallible, all her tenets are permanent, immu- 
 table ; she changes with none of the vicissitudes of the race. Tender, 
 she is domineered in the exercise of her queenship by the divine 
 spirit of charity. There is nothing cruel in any of her manifestations. 
 A benefactress, the whole world is better for her advent. It may be 
 sometimes the case that we are unable to fathom everything within 
 the deposit of faith. Mystery, however, detracts not necessarily 
 from verity. It does not follow that because we do not understand 
 we must repudiate. This is especially true relatively to the subject 
 of infants who die without Baptism. Yet we must avow that even 
 here God's goodness must in some way be patent. 
 
 I. The necessity of Baptism is as rigorous for children as it is for 
 adults. Yea, it is more rigorous. All who have attained the use of 
 reason while in the impossibility of reaching eternal bliss without the 
 sacrament, may, if not baptized in reality, be regenerated by martyr- 
 dom or by desire. This latter is an impossibility for babes — born or 
 unborn. The status of the Holy Innocents falls outside of our present 
 
 79 
 
8o APOLOGETICA. 
 
 scope. Must we, then, conclude that the gates of heaven will never 
 open for children who die without Baptism ? This is the only deduc- 
 tion admissible. Does God wish their salvation with divine earnest- 
 ness and sincerity ? There is only one answer. Yes ; God does wish 
 their eternal welfare, and He wishes it earnestly and sincerely. Sup- 
 pose there is no explanation possible ; then " ours not to make reply, 
 ours not to reason why," ours only to bow down in submission to 
 the overwhelming majesty of infinite truth. Still let us consider first 
 that, had the human race persevered in the primal justice with which 
 it was adorned at its creation, this contingency would not have 
 occurred. Hence the present sad condition of man has not been 
 brought about by the Creator, but by the creature. The trans- 
 gression introduced a new state of things, and all its consequences 
 are primarily to be attributed to man. We know that many untimely 
 deaths happen through the fault of parents — the fault of negligence 
 — ^the fault of crime. 
 
 II. Yet this view does not compensate the babe for its unutter- 
 able loss. We find ourselves confronted by what can only be con- 
 sidered as an irreparable calamity. Let us put the matter at its worst. 
 Beings irresponsible are punished? Beings to whom all voluntary 
 action is an impossibility are subjected to the same negative penalty 
 as men who transgress in the fulness of light and liberty, and all be- 
 cause, without any fault of theirs, they have not had poured upon 
 them the saving laver ! Again an affirmative reply is the only one we 
 can make. Could not God interfere ? Undoubtedly it is in His power 
 to do so. Why does He not ? Who can say ? He alone knows, and 
 because He knows we have the assurance that somewhere or other 
 in the harmonies of the Infinite there is compensation. God is just 
 beyond conception, and God is good beyond any effort of ours to con- 
 
GOD IS NOT SOLICITOUS FOR SOULS. 8i 
 
 ceive or express. Somewhere and somehow in the eternities His 
 justice and His mercy will kiss. We have admitted, and it is all 
 Catholic teaching requires us to admit — we have admitted, in the 
 question here submitted, only a negative effect of the lack of Baptism ; 
 we have admitted only their exclusion from the face to face vision of 
 their Maker. They are unconditioned for heaven. They do not be- 
 long there. Have we not customs and regulations somewhat similar ? 
 Do we allow every one that reaches our shores to disembark ? Do we 
 permit unconditional citizenship? What makes a citizen? Certain 
 terms to be fulfilled and then the lifting of the applicant's hand as he 
 makes his bow of allegiance, and, lo! all the privileges and protec- 
 tion of the national banner are bestowed upon him. Should we 
 wonder in a spirit of scepticism that God is in His way exclusive, 
 exacts conditions, and to the sacramental sprinkling of a little water 
 vouchsafes the right to the unending bliss of His kingdom ? Because 
 we do not understand, let us not reject. I know that He is just, and, 
 therefore, no wrong is done the helpless child. I know that He is 
 good, and that in some way and somewhere in His vast spaces His 
 hand is caressing tenderly the little children outside His realm. 
 
XXXV.— (5o&'0 provibencc Strctcbee mot ®ut 
 
 ©ver Soul6. 
 
 Introduction. — Possibly there is no decision of the Church which 
 grates more harshly on the sensibilities of men than that which 
 affirms that unbaptized children can not enter the kingdom of heaven. 
 But feeling is the poorest guide which reason can follow. In fact, 
 it is but a blind guide, or worse, no guide at all. What we are most 
 concerned with is truth. It would be very easy for the Church to 
 win the applause of the world. However, she is not " playing to the 
 galleries." She is the inspired teacher. She has but one mission, 
 and that is to preach the word of God, baptizing all men in the name 
 of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. " Amen, amen, 
 I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy 
 Ghost he can not enter the kingdom of God " (John iii. 5). This is 
 the word of God, and the Church must promulgate and defend it. 
 Still it must not be thought that the opponents of Catholic doctrine 
 are the only ones to whom the difficulties of this question are apparent. 
 Nor must they think that they alone are moved by the awfulness of 
 the verdict. Since the beginning the fathers and doctors have been 
 exercised, and it is not out of place to put on record some of their 
 views. 
 
 I. Opinions vary, St. Augustine, adhering to Scripture, goes to 
 the length of asserting that these children are in the same dungeon 
 house as the reprobate. He was influenced by the absolute pro- 
 nouncement of Christ and the terrible nature of original sin and its 
 consequences. He seems to be alone in his attitude. Calvinists, 
 
 82 
 
PROVIDENCE NOT OVER SOULS, 83 
 
 urged by what motives or principles I know not, assure the salvation 
 of the unbaptized children of the predestined. Cajetan holds that 
 the children of faithful parents are saved by the prayers of their 
 progenitors. This was very nearly condemned at the Council of 
 Trent. We are admonished by theologians that it is an unsafe view. 
 Bonaventure believes that such children will owe their salvation to 
 the piety of those who brought them into the world. One theologian 
 asserts that there is given to these unbaptized ones a lucid interval 
 during which they are baptized with the baptism of desire. Others 
 again suppose that there is some unknown way opened to these 
 unfortunates. We have advanced the above to make it evident how 
 the hearts of many of the teachers in the Church have been stirred 
 in order to bring not alleviation to the departed, but comfort to 
 those who are left behind. 
 
 II. These opinions have not been condemned by the Church. 
 They have not been approved either. If they afford consolation, so 
 much the better. They all imply sound doctrine. They all admit 
 that without Baptism it is impossible to be saved. They all aim at 
 finding some way or other by which the effects of Baptism may be 
 caused in the absence of the sacrament. They are mindful of original 
 sin and its consequences, which are removable only by Baptism of 
 some kind. This sin, in which all are born, is not a positive act. It is, 
 rather, a condition. By it the soul is in a state of privation. The 
 situation is a negative one. There are no rights to any of the rewards 
 promised to those who have been freed from this taint. We are 
 aware that in the beginning our first parents enjoyed prerogatives 
 which were not essential to their nature and which they were to 
 transmit to their descendants. Their disobedience stripped them of 
 all these extraordinary privileges — stripped them and all posterity. 
 
84 ^APOLOGETICA. 
 
 Among the gifts was the right to and a certain fitness for life eternal. 
 What they had not they could not give. Their descendants come 
 into existence in this denuded condition, and so, until all impediments 
 are removed by Baptism, they possess neither the right to nor the 
 fitness for the kingdom of heaven. Herein is the root of the difficulty. 
 There is original sin. Every one is born with it. Baptism alone 
 effaces it. Children dying unbaptized die in their original sin, and 
 so the gates of heaven are barred against them. The question will 
 still arise: Why all this? Our impotency to find a reply does not 
 militate against the truth ; it simply is one of the constantly multi- 
 plying proofs that our minds are small, very small, islands in an 
 ocean of limitations. 
 
XXXVI— (5o&'6 iprovibencc Doea IRot protect 
 
 Qovxle. 
 
 Introduction. — Among the many adversaries who oppose against 
 the existence and perfections of God the objection drawn from the 
 case of infants who die without being baptized, probably the hardest 
 to be convinced of their error are those who, for want of a better 
 name, we may call sentimentalists. Sentimentalism is a perversion 
 and a monstrosity. They extinguish the light of reason and they sin 
 against sound sense and the most elementary laws of logic. Sen- 
 timentalism is mawkish — nay, more, repulsive. It is not true pathos. 
 It is not genuine feeling. It is sensibility running wild, and it 
 swarms with the germs of disease and corruption. It is artificial, 
 and, therefore, begets lies. It contradicts all perspective. Truth 
 in its eyes becomes distorted, and loses all its significance and sub- 
 stantiality. It is chiefly manifest in the difficulties which it pro- 
 poses against the fundamental teaching of Christianity. It is most 
 clamorous in opposition to the justice of God, inasmuch as that jus- 
 tice abides by the reparative or punitive sanction of divine law. 
 It seems to imply in all its utterance this one calumny, that the 
 Church of God holds more for justice than for mercy, and that 
 it is inexorable in its attitude of unforgiveness. It was not a Catholic 
 who wrote in his hymns the following description of the heaven of 
 Christianity : 
 
 " In heaven above, among the blest, 
 What mortal tongue can tell, 
 The joys of saints when looking down 
 On damned souls in hell ? " 
 
 —Watts. 
 This is not the ideal Catholic paradise. 
 
 85 
 
86 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 I. The mind of the Church and the heart of the same universal and 
 tender mother are revealed in the serious investigations of her saints 
 and scholars. Relative to the fate of the unbaptized infants, we have 
 the assertion that it is better for them to have been than not to have 
 been. This, of course, can hardly be affirmed of those who are 
 eternally doomed. These children possess natural knowledge of 
 God and a natural love for Him and a natural joy in Him. They 
 are by their very condition precluded from all supernatural knowl- 
 edge, joy, and love. St. Thomas proclaims that they have no sorrow, 
 but, rather, will be sharers, according to their nature, in many gifts 
 of the divine goodness and perfections. " Although," he continues, 
 " they are not united with Him in glory, they are not entirely sepa- 
 rated from Him. Nay, they are in union with Him by participating in 
 His bounty and by the joy that comes from such knowledge and 
 love that it is in the power of their nature to attain." There are 
 floods of consolation in this view. They can not be insensible to the 
 wonderful privilege that is theirs in having left the world one 
 " white personal integrity," and are out of the danger of being con- 
 signed to the rigors of everlasting punishment. The man raised by 
 baptism to a supernatural status could not be happy in their cir- 
 cumstances, because he would have missed the end of his elevation. 
 This lack will bring no pain to the infant unregenerated, because 
 the heart desires only what the mind knows, and they remain in 
 blissful ignorance of the higher purpose of God in creating. 
 
 n. This benign view of the situation is, of course, entirely a per- 
 sonal one. It is worth only the reasons which are brought forward 
 in its support. It has affixed to it neither the approbation nor the 
 condemnation of the Church. It is valuable because, while it shows 
 that the ill-fated children are not entirely lost, while it proves that 
 
GOD'S PROVIDENCE DOES NOT PROTECT SOULS. 87 
 
 Catholic doctrine is as cognizant of God's mercy as of His justice, 
 it also establishes the wonderful freedom Catholics enjoy in all the 
 zones of intellectual activity outside the area inclosed within the 
 luminous pillars of dogma or revealed truth. Dogmas are safe 
 guides. The mind which works under their radiance operates 
 toward truth always. It is security for us to know that without 
 baptism no one enters the kingdom which is coming. If we under- 
 stand, let us rejoice; if we are confronted by mystery, let us adore. 
 This subject may well be closed with the remark of Bellarmine: 
 " Our pity for these children avails them nothing, our severity hurts 
 them not. But it would be much to our own injury if, on account 
 of unprofitable mercy toward them, we were to defend with ob- 
 stinacy any teaching opposed to the Church or to the Scripture. So 
 let no mere human sympathy be our guide, but let us in all things 
 be conformed to the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church and of the 
 Fathers." 
 
xxxviL— ^bere He no Ibereaften 
 
 Introduction. — It is impossible to fix a point beyond which im- 
 piety will not go. It is a school of negation. " To deny is easy ; 
 nothing is sooner learned or more generally practised. As matters 
 go, we need no man of polish to teach it, but, rather, a hundred men 
 of wisdom to show us its limits and teach us its reverse." This is 
 true to-day, as true as it was in the days of Carlyle. It is a ruinous 
 vice. It essays to pull down ; it never builds up. It has attacked 
 all the cherished ideals of humanity, and has never substituted any- 
 thing for them. It has contradicted everything; it has neither 
 proved nor disproved anything. What does it give us in place of 
 God, in place of religion, in place of immortality, in place of eternity ? 
 It has strewn the shores of the ages with wrecks of all splendid 
 things. It has made of the minds and hearts of men blackened ruins. 
 It has driven the soul of man into exile here, it has forced that soul 
 to herd with lower natures in the present, and pictures its future 
 as an eternal and unconscious blank. Matter is the only thing which 
 exists. 
 
 I. Materialism does not approve itself to any sound mind. Long 
 ago this teaching was condemned by the voice of Wisdom : "All men 
 are vain in whom there is not the knowledge of God; who have 
 imagined either fire or the circle of the stars or the great water or 
 the sun and moon to be the gods that rule the world ; with whose 
 beauty being delighted they took them to be gods " (Wis. xiii. 1-3). 
 It is our privilege to ask these philosophists for their proof. If they 
 
 88 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER. 89 
 
 are not secure in their position, if they put forth only a baseless 
 theory, how arrogant and reckless and audacious must they be to 
 attack the truths that are nearest and dearest to the mind and heart 
 of man! Triflers, they should be treated only with the silence of 
 contempt. It is consoling to know that from the very beginning 
 until the present time, all their so-called arguments are reducible 
 to mere reiteration of their views. They have only changed their 
 phraseology to suit the accidental modifications of language brought 
 about by the advance of the positive sciences. We can not oppose 
 the progress of human investigation. We can not, nor would we. 
 We feel, however, that incredulity and impiety have impeded the 
 advancement of genuine knowledge in the regions of higher thought. 
 " In the beginning," says St. Thomas, " the ancient philosophers, 
 looking at the universe with gross and carnal eyes, saw nothing but 
 what fell under the senses." It was only by slow stages that they 
 reached any knowledge of the truth. The materialists of to-day have 
 gone backward. They have returned to the infancy of thought. 
 They teach substantially what was taught before Anaxagoras and 
 Aristotle. They are as much in the dark concerning the origin and 
 the essence of things as was Lucretius and his adherents. The world 
 is as much a puzzle to them to-day as it was to the early thinkers who, 
 hke them, denied the existence of a living and personal Deity anterior 
 and superior to the creation of things. 
 
 II. What is materialism? Doctrinally, it holds that everything 
 which exists in the universe, from the inanimate rock to man, 
 originated from primordial, non-intelligent, lifeless matter. They 
 predicate of this matter that it and it alone is eternal. There 
 is no such thing as everlasting spirit, conscience, virtue, or God. Say 
 what they will, protest as they may, this, no matter how the colors 
 
90 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 or the shadings of their view may change, is their fundamental 
 axiom. As mentioned, this theory is not a production of modern 
 times. It is as old as thought. We might excuse it when the world 
 was young. What must we say of it after the lapse of so many 
 centuries? We are inclined to ask, Do they really assert this rank 
 materialism ? Here are some of their own expressions : " Matter 
 is the sole principle of all that exists" (Buchner). "The affinity 
 of matter is the omnipotence which creates all things " (Moleschott). 
 " Matter is absolute. It is without end and without beginning. 
 It is unconditioned, independent, and absolute" (Loewenthal). 
 What are we ? Creatures of matter, products of fire, earth, air, and 
 water. What are we? Bubbles on this great ocean of matter 
 floating in sun or shadow, disappearing in the vast bosom of that 
 lifeless sea to make way for other air bells. Away, therefore, with 
 all conscience, with all virtue, with all noble living! Let us dance 
 our short bubble life in the sunshine, let us color brief existence with 
 all the rainbow hues. Let us eat and drink and be merry, for to- 
 morrow we die and are not known, nor know ourselves forever. 
 Eat and drink we may, but with such a fate hanging over us, to be 
 merry is simply to be intoxicated ; is simply not to think ; is simply 
 to forget. This is all materialism holds out for us. 
 
xxxviiL— zcbere Is IHo fbeveattcv. 
 
 Introduction. — Not seldom the statement of a doctrine proves 
 sufficient for either its victory or its overthrow. The more clearly 
 materialism is presented, the more swiftly is it doomed to repudi- 
 ation. As it stands to-day, it is abhorrent to every instinct and every 
 yearning of human nature. It brings comfort to nobody. Even 
 were it true, it would seem kindness to man to withhold it from 
 his knowledge. It is untrue, and yet its propagation is so harmful 
 that, wherever it is adopted, ruin of every description follows in 
 its wake. It undermines personal integrity, loosens domesticities, 
 and, as history attests, it threatens the downfall of authority in the 
 state, as well as rebellion, revolution, and anarchy. It is the parent 
 of the crimes which are committed in the name of liberty, as it 
 understands liberty, that is, in the name of unbridled license. When 
 the system flourishes, it flourishes not because it appeals to man's 
 reason or to what is noble in him, but because it flatters either am- 
 bition or sensuality. 
 
 I. Materialism, of course, by its very nature, eliminates God. 
 Its first cry is atheistic. Its last clamor is blasphemous. Perhaps 
 the best way to meet the materialist is by denial. We can not but 
 admit that all the forms of corporeal existence spring from a ma- 
 terial source. Nor is it necessary to deny that this is true even of 
 living things — of the plant, of the mere animal. Thus much has 
 generally been accepted by Catholic science just as it was positively 
 declared by Plato and Aristotle. Here we might pause to interject 
 the remark that Catholic doctors have not invented a logic or a 
 
 91 
 
92 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 metaphysics to suit the teachings of the Church. They have only 
 applied the principles of right reasoning and abstraction, which were 
 established by the light of pure intelligence, by the investigations 
 of the nature and the essences of things as carried on by such minds 
 as Aristotle and Plato. These principles were maintained three 
 hundred years before Christ — three hundred years before the re- 
 demption of mankind was achieved, and all the dogmas involved 
 in that redemption were uttered by lips divine for the emancipation 
 of humanity. 
 
 II. We have defined the lengths to which we are compelled to go 
 with materialists. Our position is that out of matter only matter 
 can come, and that out of life alone can the living thing proceed. 
 These two claims we are not unwilHng to concede. The life, how- 
 ever, which we are free to grant, is the life we discover in plants 
 and in animals — ^plant life, animal life. The life we find in man, 
 especially his rational life and his liberty of action, human life, 
 transcends all the resources, all the potentiality of matter. Matter 
 can not produce a human thought, an act of human will, a human 
 word, a spiritual soul. Matter may become the tenant of spirit, 
 but spirit can not owe its origin to matter. Develop matter and 
 refine it to the utmost, reduce it to the atom, confine it to a line or 
 a point, put it into whatever alembic filled with the most powerful 
 agents and reagents, ^submit it to all the material forces of the uni- 
 verse, it will never emerge anything but a material entity, and 
 the chasm between it and spirit no finite power can bridge. This 
 is only a statement, but it implies an argument which has never 
 been answered by the materialist, and which is always a voice say- 
 ing to him, Thus far, and no farther. This thesis of ours is provable. 
 Moreover, it does not bristle, like its contradictory, with difficulties 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER. 93 
 
 insuperable. They deify matter, but their god from first to last has 
 only material characteristics. They style him infinite; he is 
 limited; he is a congeries of limits; he is a mass of atoms. They 
 call matter indestructible. The most they can prove, perhaps, is 
 that up to the present the mass of matter has undiminished since 
 it came into existence. If by indestructibility they mean that it 
 will not be destroyed, I neither affirm nor deny. But we must deny 
 their allegation if they hold that it can not be destroyed. A superior 
 power can destroy it. If they say He will not, our position is neutral. 
 If they say it is beyond His power, then we part company, for 
 there is One who said of the human body, to dust it shall return, 
 who can lay waste the mountains and the hills and the cities and all 
 the pride thereof, who can put out the sun and the stars and re- 
 duce all His creation to the nothingness whence it sprang. 
 
XXXIX.— ;rbere Is IWo Ibereafter. 
 
 Introduction. — Materialism is the grossest conception of the 
 essences of things as well as the most imperfect and inadequate 
 theory ever advanced for the explanation of the universe. In fact, 
 in matter, as in everything created, we have the same unceasing cry, 
 " Know ye that the Lord, he is God : he made us and not we our- 
 selves " (Ps. xcix. 3). We find some qualities in matter, but in 
 none of them, for example, is the power of moving itself, for motion 
 is something outside of the body and its extension. In fact, the 
 insufficiency of matter is a characteristic everywhere emphasized by 
 men of science. Says de Maistre : " Everywhere what moves pre- 
 cedes that which is moved. Matter is nothing but a proof of spirit." 
 Hence, when materialists insist upon matter as being eternally 
 in motion, they emit an opinion not only gratuitous, but contra- 
 dictory and absurd. This is the verdict of Newton in his century 
 and of Virchow in ours. If motion can not be explained by matter 
 alone, the difficulty becomes greater when there is question of the 
 composition of organized bodies, and the order and regulated energy 
 which they display. Fortuitousness, hazard, chance, none of these 
 things afford an elucidation. How long would it take for all the 
 letters that spell the words that constitute the Bible or the Iliad, 
 how long would it take them unassisted by an intelligence to fall into 
 the places and the lines which they now occupy in these two great 
 productions ? 
 
 I. Materialists deny that the human soul is immortal. What has 
 reason to say on this momentous subject? Will man's soul survive 
 
 94 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER, 95 
 
 its separation from the body? What is man? He is a rational 
 animal. His body will go the way of all material things, but the 
 elements will not absorb his whole vitality. He is a conscious being. 
 He has a perception and an understanding of himself, and he dis- 
 tinguishes himself from everything that is not he. He determines 
 himself freely to act or not to act, and he can steer himself even 
 against his strongest inclinations. He is an individual. He has a 
 personality. He lives his own life. He has a domain whither no 
 one can penetrate — the sanctuary of his thoughts and aspirations. 
 There is in him a faculty which is above matter, above all the forces 
 of matter — a faculty which can control and deify matter. He has 
 two natures, a corporeal and a spiritual nature; he has two lives, 
 a corporeal and a spiritual life. Those two lives conspire and make 
 one person, and the principle which communicates vitality to his 
 lower nature, and which is his higher nature, is his soul. 
 
 II. This soul has in its essence nothing in common with matter. 
 It has powers above the compass of matter. In fact, its powers rise 
 so high beyond the circuit of matter that we have to apply to it a 
 term which excludes everything that is matter. We call it imma- 
 terial. It is the negation of matter. How do we know it has these 
 properties? How do we distinguish it from matter? We do not 
 see the soul. It is as viewless as the air, but it is just as palpable 
 by the signs it manifests. I know its nature as I know the nature 
 of other entities. I know its nature by its operations. Our Cate- 
 chism — that sublime and yet simple compendium of all theology — 
 our Catechism speaks of three operations. They are the will, the 
 memory, and the understanding. Can matter will or remember or 
 understand? Take all the qualities of mere matter, change, com- 
 bine, refine them as you will, what will the outcome be? Simply 
 
96 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 a something characterized by extension, inertia, weight ; a something 
 cognizable by the senses; a something from which it is impossible 
 to evolve a thought; a something in which an abstraction can find 
 no place ; a something dull and senseless, which can not look back- 
 ward to the past nor forward to the future; a something which, 
 even if animated, hardly realizes the present; a something which 
 can not reply or resist when forced by agents outside of itself. It 
 is not so with thought or with memory or will. They are endowed 
 with properties of a different order. They are not weighed down 
 or confined. Matter is no barrier to them. Neither is space. No 
 scalpel can divide a thought. No forceps can seize it. No power 
 can imprison it. It can compass the ends of creation, the limits of 
 the universe, it can traverse the interstellar spaces and fathom 
 the ocean caves. This is thought as we may inspect it in our- 
 selves or study it as communicated to us by others. No one can 
 fail to see how vast is the diflference between matter as we know 
 it and thought as we know it. From the thought we go to the 
 vital principle, to the source, and we reach the soul ; that is to say, a 
 substance, not material, but gifted with all that accentuates thought. 
 This soul, say materialists, is matter. This soul, all Christianity 
 and all Paganism exclaim, this soul is immortal, i. e., it can not die. 
 
XL,—Zhcvc 1l6 mo Ibereafter^ 
 
 Introduction. — To make the above declaration is to assert that 
 when death comes to a man it annihilates him ; when dust returns to 
 dust, in' that dust will be found the atoms of the triturated soul. It 
 means that wherever we go to look for the one that is dead our 
 search is bounded by the visible horizons of the universe. There is 
 no God, no heaven, no hell. The outlook is one of despair and gloom. 
 Against this teaching there is rebellion in every man. That rebellion 
 is nothing but the spiritual soul proclaiming its immortality. " I do 
 not all die " was the faith wrung from the heart of a pagan. Christ 
 called His Father the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. 
 This was long after those patriarchs had been gathered to their fore- 
 bears. He then added the inevitable conclusion : " He is not the God 
 of the dead, but of the living " (Luke xx. 38). There is not a single 
 consideration of man's nature by which we are not led to affirm that 
 the sQut will go on existing after the disintegration of the body. It 
 follows from the nature of the soul, from the characteristics of each 
 operation of the soul. 
 
 I. Yes; reason approves the conclusion that man's soul is 
 immortal. There is the physical condition of the soul. It is simple. 
 It is not made up of parts. Death is corruption, but this break- 
 ing up into components can be alleged only of what is com- 
 pound. This is evidenced by the acts of the soul. Apprehension is 
 simple, and likewise judgment, as well as ratiocination and the ex- 
 pression of a wish or a desire. Take the power of reflection, whereby 
 
 97 
 
98 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 the mind views its own thoughts. There is no such flexibility in 
 mere matter, nor in any of the forces springing from matter. Nay, 
 more, the soul is independent of matter. It does not depend on any- 
 thing corporal for its existence or its operations. It is immaterial. 
 It is a spirit joined to and vitalizing matter. This spirituality is 
 made manifest by the soul's acts. They are all spiritual. They are 
 all independent of matter. Matter can never beget the spiritual. 
 They belong to two different worlds and demand different origins. 
 As easy would it be to generate light out of absolute darkness as to 
 produce spirit out of matter. 
 
 II. Take, moreover, into consideration the ideas of which the 
 mind is the cause; consider how in themselves these ideas 
 transcend all matter, and how they rise beyond all powers 
 of mere bodies to produce them. They have the fine aspirations 
 which surpass any suggestion of matter. What kinship is there be- 
 tween sensible objects and virtue, and right and wrong, and heroism 
 and self-sacrifice, and patriotism and what we call moral courage, and 
 so many other concepts that originate in the intelligence of man? 
 When a man is conceived and born, a material agency may explain 
 the origin of his body. But what of his soul? What, who is its 
 producer ? Does it spring from matter ? It can, not. Is it an efflu- 
 ence of some spiritual entity ? Again we have to say. No. It can not 
 spring into being of itself. No spiritual emanation can account for 
 it. Spiritual beings are one and indivisible, and therefore suffer no 
 partition. There remains only the solution that it is summoned into 
 being from nothing, by a creative act which God alone can perform. 
 So each individual soul is a distinct creation of God. Away with 
 materialism or any other *' ism " which proclaims a lower origin for 
 the human soul! This is all advanced by way of a prelude to a 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER. 99 
 
 closer investigation of the destiny of man's soul. In all that is ad- 
 vanced there are latent cogent reasons why the mortality of the soul 
 is inadmissible. The very nature of man is a demonstration of his 
 immortality. We may adduce the proof derivable from the uni- 
 versality of man's belief that his spirit will not die. The race has 
 always professed that there is an everlasting life, and has professed 
 it with the same unanimity with which it has asserted the existence 
 of God. This is attested by Cicero, whose words contain an argu- 
 ment : " If universal consent is the voice of nature, and if all men 
 in all times and all countries unite in admitting that everything does 
 not end with death, we find ourselves compelled to acquiesce in their 
 belief" (Quaest. Tusc. i. 15). 
 
XLi.—Zhcvc 1l0 mo Ibereaften 
 
 Introduction. — Why do men refuse assent to the noble and con- 
 soling doctrine of the soul's immortality? Is it in the interests of 
 truth? Is their ultimatum in this matter extorted by conviction? 
 Have they any solid foundation whereon to base their assumption? 
 They certainly have not advanced the cause of truth. They certainly 
 have not expanded the area of knowledge. They have driven their 
 votaries back to the very beginning of investigation and have suc- 
 ceeded in so obscuring the most elementary data and principles as to 
 bewilder ordinary minds. Their efforts in behalf of education and 
 civilization have been bootless. There can be only one effect of their 
 propaganda. Their doctrine gives free rein to the individual, disrupts 
 the family, and undermines the state. According to them nothing is 
 real save what comes under the senses, and sensual pleasure is the 
 supreme end of existence. 
 
 I. In spite of all their slavering, the weight of reason is on the 
 side of the teaching that the soul of man is immortal. 
 
 In the impossibility of verifying by reason alone this great 
 truth, the arguments advanced in its behalf go much more nearly 
 proving it than their allegations go toward sustaining the opposite. 
 In other words, we are impelled by many motives to give 
 credence to the doctrine of the Church, whereas not a single 
 argument worthy of consideration is found to confirm the contention 
 of materialists. If we inspect closely the nature of the human soul, 
 it seems patent that it can exist and act without the body. The 
 
 TOO 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER. loi 
 
 principle of life is essential to the body. The reverse does not hold. 
 The soul is in itself incorruptible. This we conclude from those 
 thoughts, those concepts, those discursive powers, those wishes, those 
 desires, those operations of man which have no relation what- 
 ever to the body, which are higher than any possible suggestion 
 of the senses, which so often imply a contempt for what is carnal and 
 for death, that enemy which haunts sensualists like a spectre. It 
 is from these considerations we derive the absence of all composition 
 in the soul, the absence of all parts — a condition which emancipates 
 it from corruption. Can anything be more living than life? Can 
 anything be more antagonistic to death than that which, alive itself, 
 makes everything in man to live? 
 
 II. Is the desire of total extinction natural to man? Is 
 there not a recoil of his whole being from such a fate? It is a 
 vain inquiry to ask how the soul will live after death. What 
 manner of life will it lead? It will follow the lines of its own 
 activity. It will be within its power still to will, still to remember, 
 still to understand, and the acts of those mental agencies will be bliss- 
 ful or wretched according as the soul has conditioned herself during 
 the days of her exile. Over and above this instinctive repugnance to 
 cessation of the totality of individual existence, which is as universal 
 as time and space and the race, which is congenital, and which, as 
 we have every reason to assume, is a gift to nature from nature's 
 God, a gift which He must, for the having given it, ripen into frui- 
 tion, over and above this is the omnipresent, irresistible desire for per- 
 fect happiness. This is found in the heart of every man. It comes from 
 God. Has he planted it in every breast simply as a hunger that will 
 never be satisfied? Is God crucifying humanity on the cross of a 
 yearning never to be sated? No one will say anything but nay to 
 
I02 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 such a question. Every one will answer, He has given the longing 
 for flawless felicity and, therefore, is He bound, at least by the per- 
 fections of His own divine nature, to make it possible for every man 
 to reach that blessing. Man can not be happy in completeness here. 
 This must come to him in some other world. Even in that other 
 world it is not realizable save in the possession of eternal life. 
 Eternal life is immortality, and hence the significance of the ques- 
 tion of Christ, " For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole 
 world, and suffer the loss of his soul? " (Mark viii. 36). 
 
XLU.—Zhevc He mo Ibereafter. 
 
 Introduction. — There is a law made manifest, in some or other 
 way, to every individual conscience. Its legislator is God. His 
 right to make it is deducible from His creative act. That He exercises 
 this right follows from the perfections of His being. We call it the 
 law of nature. Of its existence there can be no reasonable doubt. 
 God not only knows what is intrinsically good or evil, but He must 
 love the one and hold in hatred the other. Nay, more, He must will 
 the one and condemn the other. As man has been created free, God 
 can not compel his actions, but it must be His purpose that man do 
 good and avoid evil. This implies legislation, law. As a perfect 
 ruler He must prohibit what is against and command what makes 
 for order in His dominion. A law which by its very nature is so 
 essential for man must be promulgated, that is, man must know it. 
 That so it is, is revealed by conscience. 
 
 I. This law implies another existence besides that of the present. 
 Hence we infer the survival of the soul after death. Every law 
 must have a sanction. Every law must have attached to it a 
 reward or a punishment. The establishing a sanction is a func- 
 tion implied in legislative action. The sanction must be one 
 which approves itself to reason as sufficient for its purpose. Sup- 
 pose that God affixed no sanction to His law. In this case 
 the inference would naturally be that God was indifferent as to 
 whether His law was observed or not. In other words, contempt 
 for His dictates would be of as little concern to Him as observance. 
 
 103 
 
I04 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 What, then, becomes of the sanctity of God? How could we call 
 Him thrice holy? How could He punish infractions? What obli- 
 gating force would His laws have? What a useless thing the law 
 would be! These conclusions militate against the most elementary 
 conception of the Deity and can not be entertained. A sanction, 
 therefore, must there be. Nor will any kind of a sanction be satis- 
 factory. It must be adequate. If not adequate — if by its qualities 
 it be insufficient to deter from wrong doing or to incite to the fulfil- 
 ment of the law, then it is nothing worth, it is not a sanction. Is the 
 sanction as it can be enforced in this life possessed of these condi- 
 tions ? 
 
 II. We must admit that there are rewards and punish- 
 ments here below. We know that virtue begets true peace and 
 genuine joy of heart. It avails much to helpful conditions not only 
 of mind, but of body. It conciliates the majority of civilized men. 
 It secures the esteem and affection of our fellows in many instances, 
 and it redounds to the prosperity and general welfare of communi- 
 ties. We are aware that vice is attended with many evil conse- 
 quences. Yet does all this constitute a competent sanction? We 
 think not. A sanction worthy of the name should be in proportion 
 to the degrees of virtue or of vice. It should outweigh whatever 
 disadvantages follow from the observance of the law, as well as any 
 emolument gained by its violation. This does not appear to be the 
 case in any sanction that can be presented in this existence, as we 
 know it. Virtue has many rewards, but it does not always com- 
 pensate for the trials and the losses sustained in practising it. Vice, 
 too, in this world is at times attended by many and great evils. But 
 how often are these evils nullified by success and prosperity and 
 enjoyment? Take the case of a man to whom is presented this 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER, 105 
 
 alternative, " Do wrong or die." If he breaks the law, he may be 
 tortured by remorse, it is true, but he retains his life, a blessing which 
 all men prefer to any of the goods of earth. If he keeps the law, 
 what reward does he receive here for his heroism? It would seem, 
 then, that the sanction furnished here is incomplete. Therefore, there 
 must be a somewhere else in which, when the body dies, the soul lives. 
 This conclusion is demanded we think, by God's sanctity and justice. 
 
XLiii.— ^berc IF0 mo Ibereafter. 
 
 Introduction. — There is nothing so wearying and, which is the 
 same thing, so wearing as the confrontment of objections in the mat- 
 ter of reHgion. It is simply a brushing away of the same obnoxious 
 insects. Their buzzing is monotonous. It is the same insistence of 
 the same unreasonable protesting. The opposition of incredulity 
 to-day is identical with that of yesterday. If there be change at all, 
 it is a change of phrase merely. We venture to say that against the 
 principal tenets of Christianity there has been offered no new counter 
 argument, let us say, since the days of Simon Magus. That these 
 arguments have been answered goes without saying. They were 
 riddled by Tertullian, by St. Augustine, by St. Thomas, by Suarez. 
 Still they incessantly appear. This is true not only of the existence 
 of the Deity, but as well of the immortality of the soul. The difficul- 
 ties raised in every age have a familiar appearance. What is more, 
 we may safely affirm that all these demurrers are reducible in every 
 case to a negation. The watchword is. Deny ! Deny ! Deny ! The 
 importance of the dogma of the incorruptibility of the soul is of equal 
 degree with the dogma of God's existence. Hence, with regard to 
 the soul we must assert that its survival after the death of the body 
 is eminently consonant with reason. 
 
 I. Immortality belongs to a being by its very essence; ex- 
 ample, God. It is of the essence of God that He be and live 
 always. Or it belongs to a being by reason of the nature which 
 God has given it. Or, it is a privilege granted to an entity, 
 
 106 
 
THERE IS NO HEREAFTER. 107 
 
 as IS the case with the human body, which will rise again never 
 to die. The soul of man falls into the second category. So 
 we say immortality is natural to the human soul. In other words, it 
 is of the very nature of the soul to live, when once created, forever. 
 If it is to cease to live, then its breaking up will happen through 
 annihilation only. The objection is that it may be annihilated. The 
 soul can not destroy itself. Self destruction or suicide on the part 
 of the soul is an absolute impossibility. It is simple. It is spiritual. 
 Fancy a thought annihilating itself. Yet a thought is only an acci- 
 dent of the soul. Fancy the will or the intellect reducing itself to 
 nothingness. They are only faculties of the soul. If, therefore, the 
 soul is to sink into non-existence it must be by the action of another. 
 God alone can be that other. 
 
 II. God zvill not annihilate the soul. That God can de- 
 stroy the soul is beyond a doubt. Such a consummation is within 
 the reach of His absolute power. But God has other attri- 
 butes besides omnipotence. These attributes militate against the 
 destruction of the soul. We might ask, Is it in accordance with 
 the divine wisdom to suppose that having gifted the soul with an 
 immortal nature, that after the lapse of time, He is going to contra- 
 dict His purpose of immortality by the extinction of that soul ? God 
 endowing the soul with a natural immortality expressed His will with 
 regard to that soul. Can we conceive any reason why He should 
 mutilate its destiny? Scientists affirm that matter is indestructible. 
 Why will they not concede the indestructibility of the soul? How 
 superior spirit is in all its functions and characteristics to matter! 
 There is man's reason, a faculty of his soul. When we consider the 
 flights of that power and its lofty beckonings to the will and aspira- 
 tions and desires of man, are we at liberty to think that God, who by 
 
io8 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 His special creation of the soul gave rise to those yearnings, is going 
 to frustrate them all? " Every intelligent being," says St. Thomas, 
 "naturally desires to be always." But no natural desire will be 
 unsatisfied. There is the hope of perfect happiness. Will God, who 
 inspired that hope, defeat it ? The perpetual duration of the soul is a 
 postulate of divine sanctity and justice. Would God be holy? Would 
 He be just were He to fling back the soul into the abyss of extinc- 
 tion ? What of reward ? What of punishment ? 
 
 " Thou wilt not leave us in the dust : 
 Thou madest man — he knows not why. 
 He thinks he was not made to die; 
 And Thou hast made him: Thou art just." 
 
XLiv.— 3e0U0 Cbrl0t Gnl^ a flDam 
 
 Introduction. — This is eminently a skeptical age. Men call it a 
 scientific one. Science is the knowledge of things in their causes. 
 Infidelity is the most unscientific of all persuasions. It advances no 
 proofs. It attacks everything. Its touch is sacrilegious. Socinus 
 declared Christ was a man only. Renan made him a Frenchman. 
 " Nothing is so gullible as an unbeliever." To quote, " They have 
 gnawed away the Old Testament, they are nibbling away the New. 
 They believe the impudent lies and monstrous arithmetic which 
 babbles about a million years, a period actually beyond the compre- 
 hension of the human intellect." How many lies skepticism has 
 swallowed, instead of assimilating the saving truth ! So Christ, they 
 say, was a myth. Against this affirmation we have Christ's own 
 assertion that He was the Messiah, that He was God. 
 
 I. Christ was the Messiah. The Jews expected a Messiah, an 
 anointed one, the one sent, the deliverer of the Jewish people and of 
 the world. Some expected a triumphant King, who was to restore to 
 Israel its departed earthly glory. These misread Scripture. They mis- 
 understood the prophecies. In His dealing with the Samaritan woman, 
 who told Him that she knew a Messiah was to come. He answered, 
 " I am he, and I am going to Jerusalem, and all that has been said by 
 the prophets will be fulfilled." He reviewed at another time all the 
 prophets, commencing with Moses, had said of Him, and explained 
 all that had been written about Him in the holy books. He declared 
 His dignity as Messiah and as King of the Jews before the grand 
 
 109 
 
no APOLOGBTICA. 
 
 tribunal of the nation. This declaration was the chief accusation 
 brought against Him by the Jews (John xix. 12). They put over 
 His cross, " Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." It is very hard 
 to reduce such a large personality, a personality foretold by the 
 prophets, a personality unafraid to proclaim His mission and His 
 divine descent, a personality who proved in every way that the Old 
 Testament spoke of Him, it is very hard to reduce such a personality 
 to a myth. Is there an individual in all history, modem or ancient, 
 who looms so largely as Christ? That He was the Messiah is an 
 established fact. All the indications noted by the prophets as to the 
 time of His coming point to Him luminously. He appears at the 
 moment Israel is losing her political autonomy, a short time 
 before the final dissolution of the Jewish state, at the expiration of 
 the sixty-ninth week of years. He appears when the second Temple 
 has been built by Zorobabel after the captivity. He graced the 
 Temple by His presence just before its final destruction. The priest- 
 hood of Aaron was still dedicated to the services of the altar. The 
 precursor was preaching penance in the desert, and in Israel and in 
 the whole world there was a yearning for the coming of a deliverer. 
 He is the descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Juda, of the family 
 of David ; He is born in Bethlehem of a Virgin ; He is born without 
 splendor. We quote these facts to offset the affirmation that Christ 
 was not the Messiah and that other hysterical pronouncement that 
 He was a myth. 
 
 II. Christ was not a myth. His career was not a fanciful 
 invention. He was not the creation of imagination, a poetic fic- 
 tion. There is no character of all history whose existence stands 
 out from the records in such colossal and substantial proportions. 
 Let a man proclaim to-day on any of our thoroughfares that he is 
 
JESUS CHRIST ONLY A MAN. m 
 
 the Messiah, that he is the Son of God, that he is God. In what way 
 will he be received ? They will pass him by with scorn and laughter. 
 They will insist on his being incarcerated. Christ was not received 
 thus. He was taken seriously by his followers and his foes. What 
 has been the purpose of all unbelief? It has used all its efforts, 
 intellectual and material, to oust Him from His historical position. 
 His impress is upon the whole world. Men of mind and men of 
 station are His adherents. Would it be in the power of a phantom 
 to revolutionize and agitate the world as Christ has done? If the 
 existence of Christ is a mere invention, then history and all the 
 notable characters that live in its pages are myths and nothing more. 
 Then are we ourselves and all our environment but the stuff out of 
 which dreams are made. 
 
XLV.— Cbriet a flDan ®nl?. 
 
 Introduction. — The conflict between so-called science and religion 
 since the establishment of the Church has reduced itself to the con- 
 tention on the part of the former that the Bible is uninspired, and 
 that Christ is not God. The Catholic Church has fought her side 
 of the discussion more than well. In every battle, when the smoke 
 of the struggle has cleared, it is always discovered that the Church 
 is firm on her foundations and she stands in all her beauty with 
 her divine charter intact and her lips still proclaiming that her mis- 
 sion is from heaven and that God is God and Christ is His Son, and 
 that Christ is likewise the upholding power, who centuries ago prom- 
 ised, and held to His promise, that He would be with her until the 
 consummation of time. Christ or Diana ? was the interrogatory put to 
 the faithful in younger days. Christ or science ? is the dilemma con- 
 fronting every man coming into the world in all the centuries, and as 
 well in this twentieth era of civilization. We refer to the Bible as 
 an authentic historic document to evidence the fact, a fact as lucid 
 as any fact in the annals of the world, that Christ proved to the 
 Jews beyond the possibility of doubting that He was the Messiah 
 foretold by the Scriptures. It is noteworthy that Christ appealed 
 to their Scriptures. Search the Scriptures, He said, and you will 
 find that I am the one so emphatically spoken of by the prophets. 
 There is no doubt in any honest mind that the Scribes and Pharisees 
 were only too conscious that Christ, the Son of Mary, was the one 
 indicated by all the seers from the promise in the Garden of Eden 
 
 112 
 
CHRIST A MAN ONLY. 113 
 
 down to the days of Daniel. Among the strongest proofs of the 
 divinity of Christ is His own affirmation : 
 
 I. Christ is God. The question of antiquity, Jewish and Roman, 
 was : " Art thou he who is to come, or look we for another? " (Matt, 
 xi. 3). " Go and relate," was the answer of Christ, " what you have 
 heard and seen." Christ made His declaration and He confirmed it 
 by the holy and thaumaturgical life which He led. There was no 
 need of looking for another. The plenitude of time had come, and 
 pagans as well as Jews were in expectation. He was predicted and 
 He appeared. The desired one appeared. St. Peter (Matt. xvi. 16) 
 said in answer to a question from the Master : " Thou art Christ, 
 the Son of the living God." The Master approved of the answer. 
 He reaffirmed the assertion. He was His own great deputy. He 
 declares that He is the omnipotent Master of creation, and of man, 
 and of heaven, and of the world of pure spirits, preexisting before 
 all creatures, the light and the life of the world, in all things like 
 unto the Father, having a right to the same homage ; He declares ac- 
 compHshed in Himself the prophecy of Isaias according to which He 
 was to come to save the people; He is the Legislator and King of 
 the universe ; He forgives sins, He brings the dead back to life ; He 
 is the Judge of the world. 
 
 n. We ask, could any one utter such language save God? Is it 
 possible to employ stronger or more sublime expressions to affirm 
 His divine individuality to the world ? The people understood Him. 
 They did not hear Him say that He was a man favored by heaven, 
 or a messenger from God. They heard Him say, and they com- 
 prehended fully, that He identified Himself with God. He never 
 faltered in His proclamation of His divinity. When He knew that 
 
114 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 His fate was sealed, in presence of Pilate, who asked Him, " Art 
 thou the King of the Jews ? " "I am, but I have a kingdom that 
 is not of this world. You shall see the Son of Man sitting on the 
 right hand of the power of God and coming in the clouds of heaven " 
 (Matt. xxvi. 64). Not only no faltering in his asseveration of 
 His godhead, but an emphatic and ever increasing impressiveness 
 of assertion. Was there ever such an assertion ? Is there a single 
 trace of fanaticism therein? We find, on the contrary, good sense, 
 calm, moderation, clearness, caution. What must be the conclusion ? 
 Either Jesus Christ is the Son of God, which He declared Himself 
 to be, at the adjuration of the high priest on the day of His death, 
 or He is not. The pathways divide. Whither go we? 
 
XLVi.— (tbriet a fll>an Qnl^. 
 
 Introduction. — There can be no doubt about the importance of the 
 dogma of the divinity of Christ. It is as momentous as the existence 
 of God is. In fact, all the Christian tenets hang together. Remove 
 one and the others are foundationless. Deny the divinity of Christ 
 and you deny the existence of God and the immortality of the soul 
 and the whole hereafter. Repudiation of Christ's godhead means 
 an insult to the Deity. It impugns His veracity and overthrows all 
 evidence. Christ was one who came credentialed from God. His 
 testimony unto Himself was backed by prophecy and miracle, which 
 are the only voices wherein, as far as we know, God does or can 
 speak to man. The spoken declaration whereby Jesus announced 
 His message is transcendentally marvelous. No such utterance was 
 ever made before or since. It is impossible to mistake the meaning 
 of His words. There is nothing hazy about them. Nor did the 
 leaders among the Jews make any mistake. They knew and under- 
 stood what He said, and the very lucidness of His terms appalled 
 them and stirred up their lowest natures, whence their jealousy and 
 hatred. No violence of theirs was of sufficient force to make Him 
 yield one jot or tittle of His claim. It is no wonder that, when 
 viewed from all sides, His announcement of His divinity grows into 
 an irrefragable argument thereof. 
 
 I. It is undeniable, and herein lies the strength of His position, 
 that Christ said He was God and the world believed Him. Men, in 
 confirmation of what they allege, resort to the help of matter, of 
 
 "5 
 
ii6 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 the senses, of mind. Christ made no use of brute force. On the 
 contrary, He surrendered to it His whole career. He was no conquer- 
 ing hero. He came to sheathe the sword, not to wield it. Babylon and 
 Rome and Mahomet overran the world by the strength of armed 
 hosts. Where lie their empires to-day ? " Put up again thy sword 
 into its place " (Matt. xxvi. 52) was the proclamation of Christ. He 
 fomented no revolution. He aroused no anarchy, no Socialism. " Give 
 unto Caesar what is Caesar's " was His political formula. 
 
 H. Christ made no appeal to the senses. His teaching was an ir- 
 reconcilable enmity with the senses and the passions. He forbade 
 anger, hatred, revenge. He inculcated charity, purity, poverty of 
 spirit. Sensuality was not written on His standard. Here is His 
 device : " Whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after me, 
 can not be my disciple" (Luke xiv. 2y). He was the son of the 
 carpenter, and the army He led to revolutionize the world consisted 
 of twelve Galileans, fishermen and a publican. His word emphasized 
 a mortification of the senses. His rewards were in eternity and He 
 promised persecution and martyrdom to His followers. 
 
 in. What were His intellectual resources? The simplicity of 
 His doctrine removes it from the exclusion and loftiness of the 
 schools. Greece reached its eminence by the superior excellence of 
 her arts and her sciences. No such means were employed by Christ. 
 There was no effort for effect in all his speech. When He addressed 
 Himself to the populace the sublimest doctrine fell from His lips, 
 and yet the very children could understand. So we find ourselves 
 driven to exclaim that His assertion of His divinity was unsup- 
 ported by any natural help. It had only its intrinsic strength to con- 
 firm it. It was substantial truth. What was that declaration of 
 
CHRIST A MAN ONLY. 117 
 
 His? The speech of a fanatic? There is no trace of fanaticism in 
 His whole life. No one can characterize His opinions as wild or ex- 
 travagant. The speech of a fool ? What is there in all His demeanor 
 that savors of folly? If His speech be not that of a fanatic or a 
 fool, what is it? The speech of one speaking the truth. There is 
 no other inference left us. He was God and man and He came as 
 God's ambassador as man, and He came as His own representative as 
 God. His word was the speech of God. That word in the be- 
 ginning created the world, and in the fulness of time that word was 
 God. There is only one equation for this divine declaration of His 
 own divinity. We find it in John : " In the beginning was the Word, 
 and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." 
 
XLVii.— Cbriet wae a flDan 
 
 Introduction. — Sacred Scripture serves two purposes. It is not 
 only an inspired, it is also a historical document. In its inspiration 
 it is the basis and the proof of all the dogmatic teaching of the 
 Church. As a veracious chronicle of the past it occupies indis- 
 putably the first place among the testimonials to the truth in the mat- 
 ter of God's dealing with His creation, in the matter of Christ's life 
 and mission, and in the matter of the upbuilding of the Church. Any 
 hypothesis which asserts that it is fraudulent or mythical is absurd. 
 It is incontestably proven that every one of its assertions is his- 
 torically placed beyond the reach of doubt. " If we were as exacting 
 and as critical in regard to ancient and modem works as we are in 
 regard to the New Testament, history would still be unwritten for 
 want of duly authenticated records ; we would be still in the myth- 
 ological age " (Lacordaire, 6th conf. on Jesus Christ). It is in this 
 sense that we refer to the Bible in our proofs of the divinity of the 
 Saviour. 
 
 I. It is indisputable that Christ, who has been adored as God 
 for so many centuries by followers who glory in bearing His name 
 and in accepting His doctrine, is entitled to this worship because He 
 is really God. We have already appealed to His own declaration con- 
 cerning Himself. He proclaimed Himself God equal in all things 
 to His Father. He claims for Himself that which is the attribute 
 of God alone: John xiv. 6; John viii. 12; John vi. 51 ; John vi. 55; 
 John xi. 25; Mark xiii. 27; Matt. xiii. 41 ; John vi. 21 ; John xv. 16; 
 
 118 
 
CHRIST WAS A MAN ONLY. 119 
 
 John xiv. 13 ; Matt. xix. 29 ; John v. 19 ; John xiv. 23 ; Matt. xvi. 15. 
 He forgives sins: Luke v. 21. He proclaims Himself eternal: John 
 viii. 58. He knows all things: Matt. xix. 4. He is omnipotent: John 
 X. 18. He asserts His identity with the Father: John x. 30. We ap- 
 pend the above as corroborative of what has already been stated. 
 
 II. Let us just mention the proofs of the divinity of Christ as 
 they are formulated by Rev. W. Devivier, S.J., in his defense of the 
 Catholic faith. These arguments expand into a cumulative con- 
 firmation which is simply irresistible. There are the miracles per- 
 formed. The miracles have not all been narrated, for St. John tells 
 us : " But there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, 
 if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not 
 be able to contain the books that should be written " (xxi. 25). Yet 
 how numerous these wonders are ! In them He sways all nature as 
 He pleases. Investigate the cure of the paralytic ; Matt. ix. ; Luke v. ; 
 and the two multiplications of the loaves ; Matt. xiv. and xv. ; and the 
 healing of the man born blind ; John ix. ; and the resurrections from 
 death: Matt. xi. 5. To this we must add the consideration that 
 they were performed publicly, that they were notorious, that these 
 wonders have been examined by friends and foes for nineteen hun- 
 dred years, and that they were all done with the view of proving that 
 He was of God and that He was God ; John xi. Then we have the 
 crowning miracle of all, that is, His own resurrection. This resur- 
 rection He predicted. All the circumstances connected with it, in- 
 stead of detracting from its veracity, go to place it among the great 
 and unique facts of history. Rather it stands alone. There is no 
 other happening in the past like it or so duly authenticated. The 
 mere reading of it in the pages of the Evangelists appeals to us 
 with an eloquence that is bewitchingly irrefragable in its evidence. 
 
I20 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 No fact has ever been so thoroughly attested. It is the strongest 
 brief in the possession of the Church. It was the banner miracle. 
 It revolutionized and converted the v^orld. 
 
 III. Other proofs of the divinity of Christ are found in the 
 prophecies and their literal fulfilment. They point unmistakably 
 to the person and mission of Christ. They foretell the coming and 
 the qualities of the Messias, His birth and youth, His apostolic 
 career, His Passion and death, the establishment of His Church, the 
 sacrifice of the New Law. He directed His hearers to those mani- 
 fold predictions of His advent : " Search the Scriptures, for you 
 think in them to have life everlasting, and the same are they that 
 give testimony of me " (John v. 39). Pascal calls the fulfilment of 
 the prophecies a perpetual miracle. Hence the striking conclusion 
 of Lacordaire : " Supported by all that is most illustrious before and 
 after Him, His personal physiognomy still stands out from this sub- 
 lime scene, and reveals to us the God who has neither model nor 
 equal." 
 
XLViii.— Cbriat a flDere flDan ®nl?. 
 
 Introduction. — There are many reasons which militate against the 
 thesis implied in the above assertion. Foremost among them is the 
 inexplicable attitude of its supporters. We ask the question : " Why- 
 have the Gentiles raged and the people devised vain things? The 
 kings of the earth stood up and the princes met together against 
 the Lord and against his Christ." Yes ; we ask why they are ani- 
 mated with such fierce hostility against God and His Christ? What 
 is there in the conception of the Deity to arouse such hatred ? Why 
 do they seek to obliterate the idea of the divinity ? Is there anything 
 in that idea that is subversive of the moral order? Does that idea 
 awaken or help to subdue the passions? Is there anything that is 
 good or lofty in the thoughts of men or in their lives which it an- 
 tagonizes? We wait in vain for one reason why the concept should 
 be banished from the intelligence of man. In fact, everything we 
 know about man and his propensities should make us hail — even 
 were the concept a human invention or fiction — it as an emancipating 
 agency. The same is true of Christ. What has He done to become 
 the target of so much hostility and abuse? As a mere man He 
 sparkles like a " jewel on the outstretched forefinger of all time.*' 
 Had He not lived, what would all history since that time have been ? 
 He is the exponent of sublime ideals. His teachings have reformed 
 the world. Hence a mere man. He should be niched higher than 
 any other who has played a part on the stage of the world. But He 
 is not mere man. 
 
 121 
 
"2 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 I. He is God. We adduce as proof of this the miracles of the 
 apostles and disciples. These wonders they performed in virtue of 
 the prom'se and omnipotence of Christ (John xiv. 12 ; Mark xvi. 17) . 
 The acts of the apostles recite continual and stupendous marvels 
 operated by the apostles and their followers in the name of Jesus. 
 The new religion had to be confirmed, and nothing is so corrobora- 
 tive as a miracle. Among the numerous prodigies after the ascension 
 stand out conspicuously the descent of the Holy Ghost and the con- 
 version of St. Paul. (See Acts ii. and ix., and the Epistle to the 
 Galatians i. 15.) This gift of miracles has endured till the pres- 
 ent time. One genuine miracle is enough to prove that in favor of 
 which it is performed. How irresistible, therefore, to any honest 
 thinker must be the cogency of centuries of miracles ? 
 
 II. There are the prophecies made by Christ. They were all 
 verified. He foretold His Passion, death, and resurrection (Mark 
 X. ; Matt. xvii.). He announced the coming destruction of Jerusalem 
 and the dispersion of the Jews (Luke xix. and xxi. ; Matt. xxiv. ; 
 Mark xiii.). He prepared, by prophecy, all His followers for the 
 days of persecution, which began with the synagogue and ended 
 with the Roman emperors (Acts i. 8). The propagation of the 
 Church of Christ is among the most stupendous occurrences in the 
 annals of the world. No natural reasons can explain it. It an- 
 nounced itself everywhere, and everywhere was it received, and 
 among all classes and in an incredibly short time. It had everything 
 against it. It had secular authority and secular force ; it had wealth 
 and learning. It had the opposition of every element that went to 
 make up the then civilization. On its side there was nothing except 
 what was repugnant to the world spirit. To the human mind it pre- 
 sented mystery, to the human passions it presented restraint and 
 
CHRIST A MERE MAN ONLY. 123 
 
 penance, and yet it flooded the world like an invading sea. It had 
 only one banner. It was a dead, helpless, bruised figure on an igno- 
 minious cross. Nothing, absolutely nothing, was in its favor, every- 
 thing, absolutely everything, was against it. Impossible to con- 
 jecture the number of its adherents. We know that ten emperors 
 fell upon the new religion with all the weight of their authority and 
 cruelty, and that during that period a million died gladly for their 
 faith. Add to this that we have the testimony of two thousand 
 years proclaiming the verification of the utterances of Christ con- 
 cerning His Church. As it was in the beginning, so shall it be 
 until the end. " Why have the Gentiles raged and the people de- 
 vised vain things ? " When will the world learn the lesson that the 
 Galilean will ever conquer, that He will be with His Church until the 
 consummation of time, and that the gates of hell will not prevail 
 against His Church forever? 
 
XLix.— cbriet a r»ere fftam 
 
 Introduction. — It is a matter of history that wherever religion has 
 been at a low ebb among a people, that people were possessed of a 
 very inferior standard of morality. Their ideas were lofty in propor- 
 tion to their concepts of the Deity. Monotheism has always revealed 
 a high standard of thought and action. Idolatry has always been 
 accompanied by a degraded misconception of conduct, even in the 
 most elementary perceptions of wrong and right. Barbarism was a 
 lapse from the saving primeval traditions of the race. It may be 
 securely asserted that no barbarism has ever brought man down to 
 such depths of iniquity as the lapse from Christianity wherever it 
 has occurred. Witness the excesses of the French revolution. His- 
 tory has still one experience untried. The story has yet to be written 
 of a nation or a colony established on the principles of infidelity 
 and inscribing on its labarum, " No God. No Christ. No religion." 
 We shudder to think of the crimes, of the enormities that would 
 prevail under such a banner. We know what atheism is productive 
 of in the individual. Fancy a nation of atheists ! Fancy a people of 
 Voltaires, of Diderots, of Rousseaus as leaders and their followers, 
 disciples impregnated with their blasphemies, with their infamous 
 views of man, his origin and his destiny ! Where would be authority, 
 law, order? How long would such a republic endure? Is such a 
 condition of affairs among the probabilities of the future? We 
 answer, Why not? And yet we are compelled to say we not only 
 hope not, but also that we believe not. We must remember that, 
 
 124 
 
CHRIST A MERE MAN, 125 
 
 though the world forget God, God will not forget the world. The 
 only salvation lies in submission to Christ, who is not a mere man, 
 but God. 
 
 I. Emphatically witnesses to this great truth are the martyrs. A 
 martyr is essentially a witness — martyrdom means testimony. When 
 we consider their very large number, from Nero to Constantine, that 
 is for two hundred and fifty years, when we consider the terrible 
 nature of their tortures, when we consider their courage, the many 
 conditions of life in which they moved, the manner, calm and joyful, 
 in which they suffered, the marvels that so frequently attended their 
 valiant patience, the multitudinous conversions which were the fruit 
 of their sacrifice, we can not explain their conduct in any other way 
 than that the religion for which they laid down their lives was a 
 divine religion, and its Author divine as well. There is very little 
 doubt as to their number. It must be admitted that they were perse- 
 cuted through hatred for the Christian religion. They died, not 
 through blind fanaticism. They were clear eyed witnesses. They 
 understood their creed. They submitted to all their tortures because 
 they knew that Christ was God. 
 
 II. Again in confirmation of all our assertions we have the won- 
 derful change operated in the world by the introduction of the re- 
 ligion of Christ. We know what the world was before Christ and 
 at the time of His coming — the state of private and public morals, 
 of the family, of society. We have the startling evidence of a sudden 
 and gradually universal change of thoughts, ideas, principles. We 
 have the creation of a new public conscience. All this proves divinity, 
 for it is impossible to adduce a single human agency or a collection 
 of human agencies capable to account for this transformation. Add 
 
126 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 to this the doctrine which Christ taught. His doctrine was never 
 taught in its entirety and in its unity before His time. He taught 
 concerning the Father, God, and His attributes, concerning man 
 and the world. There are His moral precepts. They are perfect, 
 ideal, model, regenerating. He was the first to make clear in His 
 own words and through His Church the nature of divine worship. 
 His doctrine stands out unique in presence of all the doctrines of the 
 world. It moved the admiration of His contemporaries, and has com- 
 pelled the wonder of all subsequent ages. In itself it is divine. And 
 He proved that it was from God and that He was God. A careful 
 investigation will disprove the objections which have been urged 
 from the resemblance between the teaching of it and that of other 
 religions. Buddhism, as inquirers pursue honestly their researches, 
 Buddhism ceases to be in any way a teaching which can lay claim 
 to the excellence of the doctrine of Jesus. Let what they like be 
 vindicated for Buddhism or any other " ism," it still remains proven 
 that Christ is not a mere man, but God. 
 
L.—Zhcvc i0 no leternal puniebment 
 
 Introduction. — Men, it is a very remarkable fact, never quarrel 
 with heaven. They are willing to concede that there may be beyond 
 the confines of this earth a place where every one will be supremely 
 happy. When, however, they are called upon to admit that there is 
 also a place where God's creatures are to suffer unimaginable and 
 unconceivable pain forever, forthwith they recoil and they deny. 
 But it is very patent that denial will not obliterate everlasting penalty, 
 no more than the convict, by refusing to believe in a penitentiary or 
 a dungeon, will find himself free instead of passing months or years 
 or a lifetime behind prison bars. No denial of ours will change the 
 words of Christ. His words are explicit. We find the doctrine of 
 everlasting punishment emphasized (Mark ix. 41-47). On this 
 occasion Our Lord repeats three times the statement of the unquench- 
 able fire of hell where the worm never dies. Some repudiate the idea 
 of hell being eternal. Some contend that on a future day the rigors 
 of the flames will be mitigated and that there will be a modicum of 
 happiness introduced. Others claim that there will be a new period 
 of probation granted each sinner in eternity. Others simply say 
 there is no hell. We may find it difiicult to prove from reason alone 
 that the sentence of condemnation will be an eternal one. In this 
 case we have to fall back upon the divine and infallible teaching of 
 the Redeemer. 
 
 I. Whatever opinion mentioned above may be sustained, this 
 answer is always in order, that mere statement is not proof, nor is 
 
 127 
 
i«8 APOLOGETICA, 
 
 mere contradiction a successful rebuttal. St. Augustine tells us that 
 every one who denies God's existence makes the denial because he has 
 a reason for wishing God not to be. Something similar may be 
 advanced regarding those who assert that there is no hell, or, if there 
 be, it is not everlasting. It is to be feared that all these individuals 
 repudiate the dogma because their conscience makes them afraid 
 that in their moral condition were they to stand before God for judg- 
 ment, they could expect no other verdict than an adverse one. How- 
 ever, be things as they may, the teaching of the Church is safer to 
 follow than their denial. They, of course, advance some reasons. 
 Let us see what they are worth. 
 
 II. There is no hell because a punishment such as is that pro- 
 fessed by Christianity is repugnant to the divine perfections. It can 
 not be reconciled with divine justice or with divine goodness. It is 
 irreconcilable with God's justice for the reason that there is no pro- 
 portion between a crime committed, however great, and the penalty. 
 It is very hard to decide as to the proportion. Yet we are justified in 
 claiming that the one whose law and whose dignity are offended by a 
 deliberate and grave wrong is infinite. There should be something 
 infinite, it seems to us, in the retribution. It can not be in the torture 
 itself inflicted, because no finite being could bear the weight of an 
 infinite woe or pain. There appears to remain only what we might 
 call an external infinite, and that is perpetuity of duration. There 
 can be no doubt that God's law must have a sanction, and a sanction 
 commensurate with the importance of the law and the majesty of 
 the Law Giver. 
 
 III. With regard to the divine goodness we must keep in mind 
 that Grod's goodness is a perfection, and while it includes boundless 
 
THERE IS NO ETERNAL PUNISHMENT 129 
 
 mercy it excludes all vacillation and impotent condescension. Par- 
 don me if I say that God is good, but that He is not " goody-goody." 
 If we carry the argument from goodness to its limit, then there will 
 exist no sanction. In this case God's goodness would be the cause 
 of innumerable disorders, and would render the divine will of no 
 account in the eyes of creatures. God, besides, does not punish as 
 if moved by what we conceive as revenge. God hates only the sin, 
 and were it possible to detach the sin from the sinner, then He would 
 doom the sin alone. The divine goodness, by its very nature, must 
 abhor sin, must hate it because it is an attack upon all the Maker's 
 attributes, and so He must punish it, and who can say to Omnipotence 
 outraged, " Thus far and no farther " ? It is not so much the length 
 of time it takes to commit a crime we have to consider, as the ingrati- 
 tude of the criminal and the ineffable majesty of the offended Deity. 
 
LL— ^bere Ib no leternal puniebment 
 
 Introduction. — Between theory and fact there is an immeasurable 
 and, in many cases, an impassable space. The same distance in- 
 tervenes between negation and proof. It is very noticeable that 
 when a scientific theory is broached and enunciated only as a 
 theory, there is always a mob of sciolists who seize upon the hy- 
 pothesis and proclaim it as a fact, especially when it in any way 
 impugns the dogmas of Christianity. This is evidenced by the one 
 time wide spread of Darwinism and Positivism and Agnosticism. 
 There are some facts which scientific investigation never can touch. 
 We have in mind the existence of the human soul, which has been 
 contradicted because forsooth the dissector's scalpel has never laid 
 that immortal spark bare ; as if a principle of life could be found in 
 a body, in which all vitality is extinct. This view is applicable to the 
 protestations of those who oppugn the teaching of the Church re- 
 garding hell. All that they have advanced is reducible to a negation. 
 As in the case of the existence of God, so in the question of eternal 
 punishment, not a shred of proof is to the fore against either one 
 or other truth. 
 
 I. Reason has not disproved the everlasting rigors of God's jus- 
 tice against sin. Must sin be punished or not? Surely, every one 
 will grant that unto crime there must be meted out a penalty. This 
 penalty rests beyond a doubt with the lawgiver. The legislator in 
 this case being the Supreme Legislator, who has not to render an 
 account to any one of His decrees, ought, at least, be allowed the 
 privilege to affix the sanction which in His infinite wisdom He 
 deems efficient. From other sources we have the assurance that 
 
 130 
 
THERE IS NO ETERNAL PUNISHMENT, 131 
 
 His sentence under given circumstances will be eternal doom. Is 
 this sentence too severe, too disproportionate? Severe, it certainly 
 is ; unjustly severe who dares say ? Disproportionate ? Again who 
 will have the temerity to make this assertion? On what basis will 
 he ground the accusation? Is it not within the limits of reason to 
 say that God must determine a punishment which by its very nature 
 is sufficient to deter man from crime ? Independently of other legiti- 
 mate considerations, are we not obliged to say that the human race 
 would stop at no infraction of the divine law were the mulct 
 not the eternal forfeiture of happiness ? Even the knowledge of the 
 consequences does not prevent the violation of the law. Yet as far 
 as punishment is viewed as a deterrent, hell from this standpoint 
 seems to be inevitable. We expect not too much when we affirm 
 that certainly there is more in favor of, in our philosophy, 
 than against eternal punishment. 
 
 Let us (II.) subjoin here, from another repertory of argument, 
 but only as corroborative, the fact of the Incarnation. The sacrifice 
 of Christ was necessary for our salvation. Is it safe to infer that an 
 infinite victim was demanded unless there was a forfeit in some way 
 infinite to be canceled? Would the shedding of blood divine have 
 been justified were there only question, as far as man is concerned, 
 of liberating the race from temporal disaster? Undoubtedly there 
 is the cloud of mystery hanging over this puzzling problem. Faith 
 will penietrate the cloud. Reason must simply bow down and adore. 
 I know God is just. He makes a compact with temptation that we 
 will not be tried beyond our strength, and He will not punish beyond 
 our deserts. In the uncertainty, what should reason suggest? Bet- 
 ter, our sane sense will tell us to be on the safe side. Security is 
 where the Church is. Let us pray the prayer of St. Augustine: 
 ** Lord, try us ; punish us here — only save us in eternity." 
 
Lih—Zbcvc i6 no eternal punlebment 
 
 Introduction, — Protestantism is protean in its nature. Its his- 
 tory is the history of mutability and variation. Little by little it 
 extruded all Catholic doctrine, either expressly or by implication. 
 In one or other of its forms it denied purgatory and then hell, and 
 in recent years there has been proclaimed not the purgatory of tra- 
 dition, but a parody or burlesque thereof. The large charter of liberty 
 granted to all its votaries makes not only possible but inevitable the 
 introduction of views which reflect not credit but ridicule on the 
 minds of the abettors. What is there essential to Christianity which 
 has not been denied by leaders outside the Church? Free to use 
 the Bible as they please, a bishop attacks its veracity; free to find 
 in the Bible whatever caprice suggested, some of their preachers 
 denied the Trinity, the divinity of Christ and the eternal sanction 
 of God's law. In the rebound we have the opinion of those who 
 hold that there is another life, but that in that life man has another 
 chance. If he profit by this new, unauthorized, unfounded dispen- 
 sation, his will be an eternity of bliss unalloyed; if he does not, 
 then divine justice must take its course. 
 
 I. We are unable to see how it can be logically advanced that 
 the time of probation extends beyond the limits of this life. We 
 ask where and what is the proof ? It is not mentioned in Scripture. 
 It is not found among the traditionary utterances of Christ or of 
 the apostles. Moreover, it is not an intuitive or a priori truth. Vox 
 
 133 
 
THERE IS NO ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. 133 
 
 et praeterea nihil. Let us suppose that after death would begin a 
 probationary period. What about the moral law and moral order 
 here ? What regard would the legislator evince were such the case ? 
 It would be a declaration on his part that the natural law here was 
 of very little significance in his eyes. It would be simply throw- 
 ing all integrity to the winds. There would be no inducement to 
 practise virtue. The world is bad enough as it is ; what would it be 
 were there this so-called post mortem probation? To support it, 
 is insulting to God. Certainly this seems to be the very strongest 
 kind of an argument against such a theory, for theory only it is, 
 were it even worthy of the name. It would be very difficult to 
 imagine an opinion more repugnant to the ordinary views of men 
 upon such momentous questions as public honesty and domestic and 
 social uprightness. 
 
 II. Another class of " anti-sheolists " are what one might term 
 spiritual " Nihilists." Their contention is that the sanction of the 
 law consists in annihilation. They hold that eternal unconscious- 
 ness will be the penalty. The same query is again, as always, 
 forced upon us. What is the basis of their system of ethics ? What 
 is their proof ? Who is their prophet ? Who their Messias ? There 
 is blasphemy in this taking the punishment out of the hands of the 
 Creator and placing it in the will of the creature. First, annihila^ 
 tion would not be a penalty. Penalty supposes pain. Where there 
 is eternal unconsciousness there is no pain. They contradict them- 
 selves, saying that crime deserves punishment, and then affixing 
 annihilation as the sentence. But it is needless to proceed. It has 
 been a fixed belief everywhere and at all times that the soul will 
 survive the body, and that there are rewards for virtue and punish- 
 ment for crime. Plato, in his Phaedrus, having determined the im- 
 
134 APOLOGETICA. 
 
 mortality of the soul, says that after the separation souls will be 
 led to a supreme tribunal in order " to be judged as to whether they 
 lived well or not. Those who are found incurable on account of the 
 magnitude of their enormities, their many colossal sacrileges, their 
 murders, and inexcusable iniquities, or other crimes, them fate will 
 cast into Tartarus, whence they will escape never." Thanks sincere 
 and incessant be ours, that our faith has erected in the world the 
 dogma of an eternal hell for the impenitent — a dogma that warns, 
 deters, and saves. 
 
 Note. — The matter for preparing the foregoing sketches has been taken 
 from Hurter, S J. ; Devivier, S.J. ; Hettinger, and other philosophers and 
 theologians. 
 
U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 CDD313a31b