Tonty having faithfully completed his task, the ship was launched,

receiving the name of _Griffin_, as a compliment to the Comte de

Frontenac, whose armorial bearings were adorned with two griffins. Tonty

was next sent in search of the fifteen men who had previously set out. The

_Griffin_, with La Salle, the missionaries, and the remainder of the party

on board, sailed on the 7th of August, 1679, on the bosom of Lake Erie.

The artillery saluted the vessel, as she dashed through the waves, and the

missionary and crew chanted a grateful _Te Deum_ in honor of Him who had

speeded their work. The Senecas gazed with wonder at a bark of sixty tons

riding the lake with greater ease and grace than their own canoes.

Reaching in safety the straits connecting Lakes Erie and Huron, he

considered the expediency of planting a colony on the majestic Detroit, as

he glided between its islands; and on the 12th, S. Clare’s Day, as he

traversed its shallow waters, he bestowed upon the little river the name

of that saint. While the ship was passing over Lake Huron, she was

overtaken by a terrible storm, which caused even the bold captain to fear

for the safety of all on board. Uniting with the missionaries in petitions

for the intercession of S. Anthony of Padua, he made a promise to dedicate

the first chapel built in the countries he was going to discover in honor

of that patron saint, in case he should escape. The province from which

the missionaries of the expedition had come was that of S. Anthony of

Padua, in Artois; hence the selection of this saint as their protector on

this occasion, as well as for the reason that he is frequently invoked as

the patron of mariners. The storm abated, and on the 27th of August, the

_Griffin_, aided by friendly winds, entered a safe harbor in the island of

Mackinac.

Here again the “great wooden canoe” was an object of admiration and dread

to the natives, heightened by the roar of the cannon on board. La Salle,

clad in a cloak of scarlet and gold, visited the nearest village, and the

pious priests offered up the Holy Sacrifice for the benefit of those

benighted savages. The opposite bank had been the scene of the missionary

labors of the illustrious Marquette. The captain visited this spot,

endeavoring there and in the neighboring country to propitiate the

friendship of the natives as he advanced. His enemies had here too been at

work, poisoning the minds of the Indians against him far and near, and

tampering with the advanced corps of fifteen men whom he had sent out, and

who, under such influences, became faithless to their leader: some of them

deserted, and others squandered the provisions which he had entrusted to

them. Again setting sail, the _Griffin_ bore them to Green Bay, where La

Salle had the satisfaction of meeting some of his advanced party who had

continued faithful to him and their duty, and who now returned with a

goodly quantity of furs, the result of successful traffic with the

Indians. After two weeks he loaded the _Griffin_ with the rich furs

brought in by his men, and sent her with the pilot and five mariners back

to the Niagara, amidst the murmurs of his men, who dreaded the work of

proceeding in light canoes. It has been remarked(159) that had he adopted

the Ohio as his conduit to the Mississippi, one vessel would have answered

his purpose, and much suffering and delay been saved, for this river had

been known to the missionaries; by his present plan, he had to build two

vessels, one above the falls of Niagara, and one on the Illinois River. He

now set out to descend Lake Michigan in four bark canoes, September the

19th, the party consisting of La Salle, the fathers, and seventeen men;

and they continued their perilous voyage along the west side of the lake.

They were overtaken before nightfall by a violent storm, and for several

days they struggled through wind, rain, sleet, and waves, until they

landed with great danger near the river Milwaukee. Seeing their perilous

situation, La Salle leaped into the water, and with his own hands helped

to drag his canoe ashore. Those in the other boats followed his example,

and soon the landing was effected and the canoes secured.

La Salle was accompanied in his expedition by a faithful Indian, who

proved a useful member of the party; for his unerring gun frequently

relieved the hunger of the travellers with game from the surrounding

forests. They also procured corn from the natives, always paying its full

value; and even when they had to take it from villages temporarily

abandoned, where there was no one to receive payment, its value in goods

was left in its place. At this bleak landing near the Milwaukee the

Indians, moved with sympathy for their exhausted and weather‐beaten

condition, brought deer and corn for their relief, smoked with them the

calumet of friendship, and entertained them with war dances and songs.

Cheered on their way by the kindly offices and generous sympathy of the

natives, in which they felt that

“Kindness by secret sympathy is tied,

For noble souls in nature are allied,”

they pushed on with renewed courage to encounter again the perils of the

elements. The voyage from this point to the end of the lake was one

continued series of hardships and dangers. They found it frequently a

relief from the fury of the waves to drag their canoes over the rugged

rocks; and as they pulled them ashore the heaving surf dashed the spray

over their heads. They encountered a wandering party of Outagamies, or Fox

Indians, near a green and refreshing spot, where they stopped to rest and

refresh themselves, and it was only the address, deliberation, and iron

courage of La Salle that prevented a bloody conflict with these

treacherous savages. On the first of November the entire party came safely

into the mouth of the Miami River, now S. Joseph’s, previously appointed

as the rendezvous, at which the several companies were to meet.

Here La Salle was sorely disappointed at not finding the Chevalier Tonty.

Suffering from want of food and the increasing severity of the winter, the

men began to murmur; but La Salle’s bold spirit of command kept them in

subjection, especially when they saw him sharing every hardship,

privation, and danger with them. He kept them busy in building a fort for

their protection from the savages, and in exploring the country and

neighboring rivers. The missionaries caused a bark chapel to be erected,

in which the divine service was attended by both Europeans and Indians.

But La Salle’s apprehensions for the fate of the _Griffin_ began to

increase. At length Tonty arrived, and, while he relieved his captain and

men with provisions and reinforcements, he confirmed their alarm for the

vessel. The _Griffin_ had not reached Mackinac, no tidings could be

obtained from the Indians of her safety or fate, and it became, alas! too

certain that she, the first to ride triumphantly, with her proud sails

spread and her streamers unfurled, across these great lakes, had been the

first to fall a victim, with her hardy crew, to the avenging waves of Lake

Michigan.

The cavalier now prepared to go down the Kankakee River to the Illinois.

The distance to the portage was seventy miles, and much time and labor

were spent in endeavoring to find the proper portage. La Salle started out

himself to explore the country, and to discover, if possible, the eastern

branch of the Illinois. Detained till evening in making the circuit of a

large marsh, his gun, fired as a signal, was not answered, and he resolved

to spend the night alone in that fearful wilderness. He fortunately

descried a fire, and on approaching saw near by a bed of leaves, from

which some nomadic son of the forest, startled at the report of the gun,

had just fled. La Salle scattered leaves and branches around, in order

that he might not be surprised in the night, and then took possession of

the Indian’s rustic bed, in which he slept peacefully till morning. To the

great joy of his friends, he returned in the following afternoon, with two

opossums hanging from his belt. At length the Indian hunter of the

expedition found the portage. Leaving four men in the fort, the expedition

set out on the 3d of December; the canoes and all the baggage were carried

over five or six miles to the head‐waters of the Kankakee, and about the

5th of December the company, consisting of thirty‐three persons, commenced

their passage down the dreary and marshy stream, rendered yet more gloomy

by the rigors of mid‐winter. At length, after enduring hunger and cold,

they came to a more genial and smiling country, and soon their canoes

glided into the river Illinois. On the banks of the river they discovered

and visited the largest of the Illinois villages, composed of four or five

hundred cabins, in each of which resided five or six families, not far

below the present town of Ottawa, in La Salle County, Illinois. But the

place was deserted; the inhabitants had all gone to the hunting‐grounds

for wild cattle and beaver, leaving their corn stored away in their

granaries. Yielding to the necessities of his condition, and trusting to

fortune for an opportunity to make ample compensation, La Salle

appropriated fifty bushels of corn from the immense quantities stored away

in the capacious granaries of the village. Re‐embarking on the 27th of

December, the party proceeded down the current. On the 1st of January,

1680, the feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord was solemnly and

appropriately celebrated, the salutations of the New Year were exchanged,

and we may well imagine with what hearty and earnest good‐wishes those

brave voyagers blessed each other. On the same day, after passing through

Lake Pimiteony, now Lake Peoria, our voyagers came suddenly upon an Indian

encampment on both sides of the river. Having heard that the Illinois were

hostile, La Salle arranged his flotilla for the emergency; the men were

armed, and the canoes were placed in battle array across the entire river,

La Salle and Tonty occupying the two canoes nearest the shore. Observing

that the Indians were somewhat alarmed and disposed to parley, La Salle

boldly landed in the midst of the innumerable bands of dusky warriors,

prepared for either war or peace, and by his skill and invincible courage

soon succeeded in making them his friends. After smoking with them the

calumet of peace, he explained the circumstance of his having taken their

corn, and then paid them liberally for it, to their great satisfaction. He

also told them that he came amongst them in order to give them a knowledge

of the one true God, and to better their condition. An alliance of

friendship was entered into, and all retired apparently to rest.

But during the night emissaries from La Salle’s enemies arrived. A grand

council was held, as that is the favorite time with the Indians for

transacting their most important business. The poison was infused into the

minds of La Salle’s recent allies; and on the following morning his keen

eye soon saw that the intrigues of his enemies had not failed to follow

him to that distant region, and it was only his brave, frank, and

determined bearing that enabled him to surmount the countless obstacles

that were thus thrown in his way. The effect of this intrigue, however,

was not wholly lost on his own men. Six of them deserted him at this

trying juncture. Severe as was this loss, his proud spirit bore up

manfully under it; but the loss of his vessel was a severer trial to him,

but one that failed to dampen the ardor of his enthusiasm or the

determination of his will. He selected a spot for a fort half a league

from the Indian camp and near the present city of Peoria; and while he

bestowed upon his fort the name of Crèvecœur—Broken Heart—under the sad

influence of the loss of the _Griffin_ and the machinations of his

enemies, the vigor with which he raised its walls and arranged its

armament is ample proof that he still possessed a heart full of courage

and hope.

In the middle of January the entire company took up their residence within

the fort. Father Membré remained with the Indians, was adopted into the

family of a noted chief, and devoted himself to the task of winning the

Illinois to the Christian faith. Father de La Ribourde exercised his

ministry at the fort, where he erected a chapel; and Father Hennepin is

said to have “rambled as his fancies moved him.”

La Salle engaged a portion of his men in building a brigantine forty‐two

feet long and twelve feet broad, in which to descend the Mississippi. On

the 29th of February, 1680, he sent an expedition under the direction of

Father Hennepin, accompanied by Picard Du Gay and Michel Ako, to explore

for the first time the Mississippi above the mouth of the Wisconsin, the

point from which Father Marquette’s voyage down the great river commenced.

In six weeks the hull of the brigantine was nearly ready to receive the

masts and rigging, but the necessary materials were wanting to complete

the equipment. An abundance of such materials had been placed on board the

_Griffin_, but these had been buried beneath the waters of the lake with

the ill‐fated vessel. Gloomy indeed was the prospect before our brave

cavalier; but bold resolves are rapidly conceived and speedily executed by

daring spirits. He placed Tonty in command of the fort, and, in order to

procure what was necessary for the new vessel, he determined to return on

foot to Fort Frontenac, distant at least twelve hundred miles. His journey

lay along the southern shores of Lakes Erie and Ontario, through vast

forests; innumerable rivers intervened, which he had to ford or cross on

rafts, and this, too, at a season of the year when the drifting snow and

floating ice threw extraordinary dangers and fatigues in the path of the

traveller. For food he must rely entirely upon the hazards of the chase.

The history of our race contains the record of few such undertakings as

this; yet the spirit of La Salle faltered not. On the 2d of March the bold

cavalier shouldered his musket and knapsack, and, with three Frenchmen and

his Indian hunter, started upon his perilous journey:

“My heart is firm;

There’s naught within the compass of humanity

But I would dare and do.”

After La Salle’s departure the brave and faithful Tonty began to

experience in turn the frowns of fortune. While superintending the

erection of a new fort at a spot selected by La Salle, Tonty received the

news of an insurrection at Fort Crèvecœur. This, too, was instigated by La

Salle’s enemies. Deserted by more than half his party, Tonty took up his

quarters at the great Indian village, where he was treated with

hospitality. After a residence there of six months a war‐party of Iroquois

and Miamis approached the village, and for a long time Tonty and Father

Membré, at great peril and with much ill treatment at the hands of the

invading savages, endeavored to negotiate a peace. Failing in every

effort, and finding that dangers and perils were gathering thick and fast

around him, Tonty resolved to make his escape with his remaining five

companions, which he succeeded in accomplishing, in an old and leaky

canoe, on the 18th of September. On the following day, about twenty‐five

miles from the village, they drew the canoe to the shore for repairs.

While thus engaged they had the misfortune of losing for ever the great

and good Father Gabriel de La Ribourde, who, with a mind fond of the

beautiful in nature, as well as with a soul that loved all men, had

wandered too far up the banks of the river, drawn on by the picturesque

scenery that lay before him, was met by three young Kickapoo warriors, and

fell a victim to the unsparing tomahawk. After passing, with heavy hearts,

over ice and snow, rambling for some time almost at random in the woods,

and enduring hunger and delays, they fortunately reached a village of the

Potawatamies, where they were received with hospitality. Tonty was

detained at the village by a severe and dangerous illness. Father Membré

advanced to the missionary station at Green Bay; here they all met in the

spring, and then proceeded to Mackinac to await the return of La Salle.

In the meantime La Salle, after stopping twenty‐four hours at the Indian

village which he had previously visited, and finding that the two men whom

he had despatched from the Miami River to Mackinac had obtained no tidings

of the _Griffin_, now abandoned every lingering hope for her safety. He

pressed forward on his great journey, only to hear of new disasters and

losses at Fort Frontenac. The fact that he accomplished such a journey

under such circumstances is sufficient to illustrate the endurance and

unbending resolution of this great explorer. Of this chapter in the

history of La Salle Bancroft thus writes:

“Yet here the immense power of his will appeared. Dependent on

himself, fifteen hundred miles from the nearest French settlement,

impoverished, pursued by enemies at Quebec, and in the wilderness

surrounded by uncertain nations, he inspired his men with

resolution to saw trees into plank and prepare a bark; he

despatched Louis Hennepin to explore the Upper Mississippi; he

questioned the Illinois and their southern captives on the course

of the Mississippi; he formed conjectures concerning the Tennessee

River; and then, as new recruits were needed, and sails and

cordage for the bark, in the month of March, with a musket and a

pouch of powder and shot, with a blanket for his protection, and

skins of which to make moccasins, he, with three companions, set

off on foot for Fort Frontenac, to trudge through thickets and

forests, to wade through marshes and melting snows, having for his

pathway the ridge of highlands which divide the basin of the Ohio

from that of the lakes—without drink, except water from the

brooks; without food, except supplies from his gun. Of his

thoughts on that long journey no record exists.”

He arrived safely at Fort Frontenac, but his affairs had all gone wrong in

his absence. In the destruction of his vessel and cargo he had sustained a

loss of a large portion of his means; besides this, his agents had

plundered him in the fur trade on Lake Ontario; a vessel freighted with

merchandise for him had been lost in the Bay of St. Lawrence; his heavily‐

laden canoes had been dashed to pieces by the rapids above Montreal; some

of his men, corrupted by his enemies, had deserted, carrying his property

among the Dutch in New York, and his creditors, availing themselves of a

report, gotten up by his enemies, that he and his companions had been

lost, had seized on his remaining effects, and sacrificed them in the

market. But one friend remained to him in all Canada—the Comte de

Frontenac. The undaunted La Salle still pushed forward his work; having

arranged his affairs as well as he could, he secured the services of La

Forest as an officer, and engaged more men. On the 23d of July, 1680, he

set out on his return. Detained more than a month on Lake Ontario by head‐

winds, he reached Mackinac in the middle of September, and the Miami

towards the end of November. Proceeding to the spot where he had left

Tonty, he found his forts abandoned, the Illinois village abandoned, and

could hear nothing of the companions whom he had left behind him. He now

heard of the Iroquois war, and spent some time and effort in endeavoring

to effect an alliance of all the neighboring tribes against the Illinois.

Finding it impossible to accomplish his purpose for want of a larger

force, he returned to the Miami River late in May, 1681, and about the

middle of June he had the happiness of saluting Tonty and his companions

in the harbor of Mackinac. The two cavaliers sat down together, and

related to each other their respective misfortunes and hardships. Thus

another year’s delay was occasioned; but in the meantime the trade with

the Indians was prosecuted with vigor. Some idea may be formed of the

material of which these two men were made when it is related that even

now, when all their plans had failed and all seemed lost to them, the

ardor with which they first commenced this wonderful task remained

unbroken and undiminished. In order to renew their preparations for the

exploration of the Mississippi, they all set out in a few days for Fort

Frontenac, from which La Salle had already twice departed with the bold

and lofty purpose of exploring and laying open to the world the interior

geography of the continent. An eyewitness to these interesting conferences

between La Salle and Tonty relates that the former maintained “his

ordinary coolness and self‐possession. Any one but him would have

renounced and abandoned the enterprise; but, far from that, by a firmness

of mind and an almost unequalled constancy, I saw him more resolute than

ever to continue his work and to carry out his discovery.”(160)

As already mentioned, Father Hennepin had been commissioned by the captain

to explore, with his selected companions, the Upper Mississippi, probably

the last aspiration of La Salle after the discovery of the northwest

passage to the China Sea. Proceeding down the Illinois to its mouth,

Father Hennepin directed his canoe up the unexplored stream, and on the

eleventh day he and his companions were near the Wisconsin River. Turning

up this river, they proceeded nineteen days, when the grand cataract burst

for the first time upon the view of Europeans.

“It hath a thousand tongues of mirth,

Of grandeur, or delight,

And every heart is gladder made

When water greets the sight.”

It was called “The Falls of St. Anthony” in honor of the holy founder of

the order of the Recollects. Falling in with the Sieur Du Luth, the two

parties, nine in number, rambled and messed together till the end of

September, 1680, when they all set out for Canada. Father Hennepin sailed

from Quebec to France, where he published, in 1684, an account of his

travels and discoveries. Thirteen years after this, and ten after the

death of La Salle, he published his _New Discovery of a Vast Country in

America, between New Mexico and the Frozen Ocean_, in which the love of

the marvellous is regarded by historians as having far transcended the

limits of authentic and trustworthy narrative, and as conflicting with the

recognized and just pretensions of La Salle.

Upon his return to Fort Frontenac La Salle lost no time in preparing for

another effort. He arranged his affairs with his creditors, pledged Fort

Frontenac and the adjacent lands and trading privileges for his future

expenses, and enlisted forces for his expedition. On the 28th of August,

1681, the company set out in canoes from the head of the Niagara River,

and on the third of November they had arrived at the Miami. The constant

and ever‐faithful Tonty and the good Father Membré accompanied the

expedition, which consisted of fifty‐four persons, of whom twenty‐three

were Frenchmen, eighteen Abnakis or Loup Indians, ten Indian women whom

the Indians insisted should go along in order to do their cooking, and

three children. Six weeks were consumed at the Miami in making the

necessary arrangements. The Sieur Tonty and Father Membré proceeded with

nearly the entire company along the southern border of Lake Michigan to

the mouth of the Chicago River, dragging their canoes, baggage, and

provisions for about eighty leagues over the frozen waters of the Illinois

on sledges prepared by the indefatigable Tonty. La Salle travelled on foot

from the Miami River, and joined the company on the 4th of January, 1682.

They continued their journey in the same way up the Chicago to Lake

Peoria, where the canoes were carried upon the waters, and on the 6th of

February the great river, then called the “Colbert,” received its

explorers safely upon its waves. They were detained by the floating ice

till about the 19th, when the flotilla commenced its eventful voyage. On

the same day, six leagues lower down, they passed the mouth of the

Missouri, then called the Osage. They stopped at a deserted village of the

Tamaroas Indians, whose people were absent on the chase, and then slowly

passed on for forty leagues till they reached the Ohio, stopping

frequently on the route to replenish their stock of provisions by hunting

and fishing. Leaving the Ohio, they passed through one hundred and twenty

miles of low, marshy river, full of thick foam, rushes, and walnut‐trees,

till, on the 26th of February, they came to Chickasaw Bluffs, where they

rested. Here a fort was built and called Fort Prudhomme, in memory of

Peter Prudhomme, one of their companions, who was lost while hunting in

the woods, supposed to have been killed or carried off by a party of

Indians, whose trail was discovered near by. Afterwards, by the untiring

and determined efforts of La Salle, and after nine days scouring the

country, Prudhomme was found and restored to his companions; but the fort

long retained his name. Proceeding about a hundred miles, they heard the

sound of drums and the echo of war‐cries, and soon they came abreast of

the villages of the Arkansas Indians, whose inhabitants were informed at

one and the same time that the strangers were prepared for war—as was

evidenced by the erection of a redoubt upon the shore; or for peace—as was

manifested by their extending the calumet of peace. They found the Indians

peaceable and friendly, and here our voyagers stopped to rest. Two weeks

were spent amongst these gay, open‐hearted, and gentle natives in smoking

the calumet, partaking of feasts, and obtaining Indian corn, beans, flour,

and various kinds of fruits, for which they repaid their entertainers with

presents which, however trifling, pleased their fancy much. Father Membré

erected a cross, around which the natives assembled; and though he could

not speak their language, he succeeded in acquainting them with the

existence of the true God and some of the mysteries of the true faith. The

Indians seemed to appreciate all he said, for they raised their eyes to

heaven and fell upon their knees in adoration; they rubbed their hands

upon the cross, and then all over their own bodies, as if to communicate

its holiness to themselves; and, on the return voyage, the missionary

found that they had protected the cross by a palisade. La Salle also took

possession of the country with great ceremony in behalf of France, and

erected the arms of the king, at which the Indians expressed great

pleasure.

On the 17th they proceeded on their route, and were received and

entertained most hospitably at another village of the same Akansas nation.

On the 20th they arrived at a small lake formed by the waters of the

Mississippi, on the opposite side of which they found a gentle tribe of

Indians, far more civilized than any they had yet met, whose sovereign

ruled over his people with regal ceremony, whose houses were built with

walls and cane roofs, were adorned with native paintings, and furnished

with wooden beds and other domestic comforts. Their temples were

ornamented, and served as sepulchres for their departed chiefs. La Salle

being too fatigued to visit this interesting people, he sent the Sieur

Tonty and Father Membré on an embassy to the king, to whom they carried

presents, and who received them with great ceremony. The king next

returned the compliment by a visit to the commander, sending his master of

ceremonies and heralds before him, and coming two hours afterwards

himself, preceded by two men carrying fans of white feathers, himself

dressed in a white robe beautifully woven of the bark of trees, with a

canopy over his head, and attended by a royal retinue. The king’s demeanor

during the interview was grave but frank and friendly. Resuming their

route on the 26th of March, thirty or forty miles below this they came

among the Natchez Indians, whose village La Salle, with some of his

companions, visited by invitation, sleeping there that night and receiving

hospitality. A cross was erected here, too, to which were attached the

arms of France, signifying that thereby they took possession of the

country in the name of their sovereign. The Holy Mass was also offered,

and the company received the Blessed Sacrament. They next visited the

village of Koroa, and then, advancing over a hundred miles, on the 2d of

April they came to the country of the Quinipissas, a belligerent tribe,

who answered a proposal to smoke the calumet of peace by a shower of

arrows. But having no object to attain by difficulties with the natives,

La Salle passed on to the village of the Tangiboas, three of whose

deserted cabins he saw full of the bodies of Indians who, fifteen or

sixteen days before, had fallen victims in an engagement in which the

village was sacked and pillaged. Speaking of La Salle while thus

descending the great river, Bancroft writes: “His sagacious eye discerned

the magnificent resources of the country. As he floated down its flood; as

he framed a cabin on the first Chickasaw bluff; as he raised the cross by

the Arkansas; as he planted the arms of France near the Gulf of Mexico, he

anticipated the future affluence of the emigrants, and heard in the

distance the footsteps of the advancing multitude that were coming to take

possession of the valley.”

To Be Concluded Next Month.

Birth‐Days.

“WHO ARE JUST BORN, BEING DEAD.”

Who weeps when love, a cradled babe, is born?

Rather we bring frankincense, myrrh, and gold,

While softest welcomes from our lips are rolled

To meet the dawning fragrance of a morn

Of checkered being. Even while the thorn

Keeps pace with rosy graces that unfold,

Do we with rapture cry, “Behold, behold,

A heaven‐dropped flower our garden to adorn!”

And yet when from our darling fall the years

As from the rose the shrivelled petals rain,

And into newer life the soul again

Springs thornless to the air of purer spheres,

So blinded are we by our bitter pain

We greet the sweeter birth with selfish tears.

The Future Of The Russian Church.

By The Rev. Cæsarius Tondini, Barnabite.

II.—Continued.

Let it only be borne in mind _what_ are those things which are required of

her members by the faith and discipline of the Orthodox Church, and it

will be granted us, at least face to face with unbelief, that her priests

need something more than the ordinary respectability of a worthy man, an

obedient subject of his sovereign, a good father of a family, faithful to

his wife and devoted to his children.(161)

This _something more_ is possessed by the Catholic Church. The Russian

Church has lost it. Whatever may be thought of the ecclesiastical law on

the celibacy of the priesthood, we think it cannot be denied that a

priest, living as an angel upon earth, exercises an influence which is

always lacking to a married priest. This “magnetism of purity,” as it has

been called, has inspired one of the noblest odes of the great English

poet, Tennyson;(162) and they who in good faith argue against sacerdotal

celibacy do so because, in their opinion, the purity required by the

Catholic Church is a virtue too celestial to be met with here below; thus

reasoning as did that Jew who, after reading a treatise on the Holy

Eucharist by the Abbé Martinet,(163) said to us, “This cannot be true,

because it would be too beautiful!” Those who reason as did this Jew

conclude too easily from difficulty—what virtue is not difficult?—to

impossibility? We do not undertake to convince those who have not faith,

and who refuse to allow the efficacy of supernatural means; for the task

would be a hopeless one. But if they have faith, we will submit to them

the following consideration, which will not be without some weight.

And this is that the Catholic Church earnestly invites all her priests to

celebrate _daily_ the holy Mass, and makes it their strict duty to recite

every day, with attention and piety, the divine Office. In undertaking the

defence of the Russian clergy M. Schédo‐Ferroti says: “Hypocrisy is a vice

unknown among them, their piety being of a genuine stamp, and only giving

outward expression to the sentiment which is really felt—namely, a belief

in the sanctifying virtues of the ceremonies which they are called to

perform.”(164) Let it, then, be permitted to us also to express here our

firm belief in the sanctifying virtue of the Mass and the divine Office.

The Holy Eucharist is called in Scripture _frumentum electorum et vinum __

germinans virgins_—“the wheat of the elect and the wine which makes

virgins spring forth” (Zach. ix. 17). With regard to the divine Office, it

is the prayer _par excellence_ of the church. As the Lord’s Prayer, taught

and recommended by Jesus Christ himself, has a power which is special to

it, and a particular efficacy, so also is a sanctifying virtue attached to

a prayer chosen and placed daily on our lips by the church. The Mass and

the divine Office, in a manner, force the priest to have always about him

some thoughts of heaven. If vanity or worldly seductions acquire over him

a momentary ascendency, the Mass and the divine Office recall him to those

salutary truths which never change.

We will not dwell longer on this point; the reader will be well able to

make its practical application. We will only now add that, if to have been

capable of an act of great generosity is a title to indulgence for many

defects; if the remembrance of an heroic action in favor of one’s country

or of humanity surrounds with an aureola of glory the whole existence of

him who has performed it; and if, in short, people hesitate to pronounce

sentence against him, even when he has deserved blame, let it also be

remembered that every Catholic priest, whoever he may be, has

accomplished, at least once in his life, an act of the greatest

generosity. He has sworn, on being admitted into Holy Orders, to renounce

every affection which, by dividing his heart, could hinder him from

devoting himself solely and without reserve for the good of souls; and

solely with that intent has he voluntarily chosen the path of self‐denial

and of conflicts which are the consequences of his generosity. This being

considered, there is nothing surprising in the fact that a certain

influence is invariably exercised by the Catholic priest who is faithful

to his duties, even if his learning and education be defective.

Now, this influence, doubly necessary in Russia, on account of the social

inferiority of the orthodox clergy, is entirely wanting to all that

portion of the clergy which is in contact with the people;(165) and the

fatal consequences of this want will make themselves especially felt in

that day when nothing shall be unimportant that can help to keep alive

faith in the Russian people.

And this is not all. In the poem alluded to above Tennyson puts these

words into the mouth of his hero, the virgin‐knight:

“My good blade carves the casques of men,

My tough lance thrusteth sure,

My strength is as the strength of ten,

Because my heart is pure.”(166)

He who thus reveals to us the intimate relation existing between purity

and strength is not a Catholic. If we had expressed the same thought as

originating from ourselves, we might have been charged with mysticism;

this is why we have quoted the great poet. He would not fear being called

upon to justify his thought; let him therefore be the one attacked.

But whatever may be the weight which experience gives to this thought of

Tennyson’s, there is no need to wait for the time when the Russian clergy

shall be waging war against unbelief, to judge of the strength they are

likely to have for the combat. In a chapter devoted to revelations of the

state of the “orthodox” clergy, M. Schédo‐Ferroti takes praiseworthy pains

to exhibit their good qualities. “I have found,” he writes, “with some

regrettable exceptions, that the Russian priest possessed two valuable and

truly Christian qualities, the frequency of which constitutes in some sort

a characteristic feature of the class. The Russian priest is pious without

any ostentation, and he is gifted with a wonderful faculty for supporting

misfortune, under whatever form it may overtake him.”(167) We have already

made some observations on the first of these two qualities, and will now

do the same for the second.

To be endowed with a marvellous power of supporting misfortune—what better

preparation, apparently, could there be for supporting the struggle of the

future? It is to patience that our Lord Jesus Christ promises the

possession of our souls for a happy eternity when he says: _In patientia

vestra possidebitis animas vestras_—“In your patience you shall possess

your souls” (S. Luke xxi. 19). These divine words, alas! cannot in any way

find their application in the patience of the Russian clergy. The patience

whereof our Lord speaks is that which fills and sustains the soul, and

which places in our mouths words whose wisdom puts our adversaries to

silence.

This explanation is not our own; it is that of Jesus Christ himself. “They

will lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the

synagogues and into prisons, dragging you before kings and governors, for

my name’s sake: and it shall happen to you for a testimony. Lay it up,

therefore, in your hearts, not to meditate before, how you shall answer.

For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall

not be able to resist and gainsay. And you shall be betrayed by your

parents and brethren, and kinsmen and friends: and some of you they will

put to death. And you shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but a

hair of your head shall not perish. In your patience you shall possess

your souls” (S. Luke xxi. 12‐19). The patience here described corresponds

exactly with the patience of which the Catholic bishops and priests of

Switzerland, Germany, and elsewhere are offering us at this very time so

edifying and admirable an example.

The patience taught by our Lord, then, is not wanting to the Catholic

clergy; can we hope to find it in the Russian clergy in the day when

orthodoxy shall be threatened? Let us well consider the words of our Lord

which we have just quoted, bearing in mind the energetic spirit which they

suppose, and let us then compare them with the following words of the most

devoted advocate of the orthodox clergy in Russia: “This readiness to

bear, without murmuring, the sudden reverses of fortune,” says Schédo‐

Ferroti, “this spontaneous submission to the decrees of Providence, is too

Christian a virtue to allow us to refuse it the admiration which it

deserves; but it seems to us that the combination of circumstances which

has contributed to develop in the Russian clergy this _mute resignation_

has also exercised a depressing influence upon their moral strength, in

paralyzing the powers of their will by rendering its free exercise utterly

and invariably impossible. It is the natural consequence of excessive

suffering, whether physical or moral, to end in the enervation of the

patient, by depriving him of the faculty of action, by destroying all his

energy, and leaving him destitute even of any belief in his own strength;

allowing him to remain in possession of but one single conviction, that of

his powerlessness to struggle against fate—a conviction that finds its

expression in this mute and absolute resignation which we find in the

lower Russian clergy.”(168)

Poor Russian clergy! They are all that they can be expected to be,

considering what the czars have made them. The sufferings of the Russian

priest are not forgotten by God, neither does he forget his resignation.

Far from desiring to cast a stone at him, we gladly point out all that we

can find in his favor. Reduced to such a degree of indigence that he is

compelled to maintain himself by laboriously toiling in the fields, the

pressing needs of life bow down not only his brow, but his soul also,

towards the earth. What right have we to expect that he can devote to the

interests of souls the time and thought imperiously demanded by the daily

necessities of his own existence? And even could he forget himself, and in

self‐devotion taste the sublime joy of sacrifice, he is not alone; and

will his wife and children also become so many victims of his zeal for

souls?

This feebleness, this helplessness, these bonds—these are the very things

which many would desire to see also in the militant ranks of the Catholic

Church. “But wherefore, then, is it,” asks the church, in pointing out the

armies of this world, “that the secular governments will that the soldiers

called to defend their country should be alone and free?”(169)

But if to be single and free is an element of strength lacking to the

Russian priest, already by long habituation to suffering and slavery

reduced to the state of which so striking a picture is drawn by Schédo‐

Ferroti, another support is also wanting to him, the power of which is

evident in the Catholic clergy. In our day, and under our very eyes, every

circumstance concurs to encourage apostasy among the latter. Priests who

fail in their duty gain the favor of governments, a considerable portion

of the press, the secure perspective of honors and offices; they are

proclaimed the only honest, the only true ministers of Jesus Christ, who

alone comprehend his interests or succeed in causing him to be loved by

souls. In all this there is something seductive, not only for the

ambitious and such as would free themselves from the severe discipline of

the church, but for those also who, in presence of the ravages which

unbelief is making, persuade themselves—not with much humility—that if the

church would act according to their ideas, the interests of God would be

better secured. In spite of all these things, the number of apostates is a

mere nothing when we take into consideration the number of Catholic

priests. Did those who have undertaken to make war against Catholicity

expect this check?—which, we remark in passing, witnesses plainly against

the alleged prevalence of abuses. Have they well calculated the forces of

the enemy which they flattered themselves they were about to annihilate?

Unless we are mistaken, they think that its strength is the same in the

present day as it was in the time of Luther, and that, if whole nations

were then withdrawn from the church, there is no reason why they should

not be so now. But the Protestantism of those days allowed a true faith in

God, in Providence, in Jesus Christ, and retained a baptism in every

respect valid. It is allowable to believe that if God has permitted that

whole nations should be snatched from the _immediate_ care of the church,

his providence will keep them from ever falling back into the state in

which they were before the redemption; though this is the logical result

of modern Protestantism. Besides, the social and political situation of

Europe, the habits of the various nations, and especially the difficulty

of communication, then permitted sovereigns to raise, as it were, so many

walls of China round the confines of their states. They could at that time

isolate their subjects, and only allow them just so much

intercommunication with the rest of the world as _they_ might choose to

consider suitable to the interests of the state. If thought itself could

not be chained, its manifestations at least could be circumscribed or

stifled. This is no longer possible in the present day; a pamphlet, a

journal, a speech in parliament, even to a simple word of a bishop, can

now, from the other end of the world, trouble the repose and disturb the

plans of a powerful conqueror. For thought there are no longer any

barriers possible, nor yet police; and thought makes revolutions.

Now, amongst the thoughts which escape the vigilance of all police, and

which pass through every barrier, there is also that of the constancy

which, in no matter what period of the existence of the Catholic Church,

is shown by men living under different climates, ruled by various

institutions, but _brothers in the faith_. If to bear the same name, to be

born on the same soil, and to speak the same tongue, creates bonds so

powerful and so devoted a defence of common interests, fraternity in the

Catholic faith yields the palm in nothing to any other fraternity

whatsoever for the powerfulness of its effects. The humble _curé_ of a

poor parish hidden among the gorges of the mountains learns that a priest

in a distant land has been imprisoned for refusing to betray his

conscience. He is moved by the tidings, and takes a lively interest in the

fate of the priest, following anxiously in his journal the narrative of

the struggles of this confessor of the faith. During this time, without

his being aware of it, a salutary work has been going on in his mind. Soon

afterwards he finds himself in the same case—namely, of being called upon

to suffer for the performance of those duties which his quality of priest

imposes upon him. His adversaries, judging him by the gentleness of his

language and his life, expect to intimidate him by a word; but, to their

amazement, they find in him the firmness of an apostle. From whence did he

gain this courage? They know not, neither does he; that which impressed

his soul and prepared it for the conflict was nothing else than the story

of the sufferings of his brother in the faith and in the priesthood, in a

distant and foreign land.

Well, then, this sustaining thought which supports the Catholic priest by

making him feel himself a member of that family which is as vast as the

world and a brother in the faith with martyrs—this support will be wanting

to the Russian clergy when upon it alone will depend the fate of

orthodoxy. The Russian priest, who, not being alone, will have need of a

courage so much the greater as there are beings dear to him whose

existence is bound up with his own, will seek examples to encourage him;

but will he find them? The same causes which have produced the _mute

resignation_ spoken of by Schédo‐Ferroti authorize us to think that the

Russian clergy will not have its martyrs, or, if there should be some,

that their number will be too small to counterbalance the example of the

general feebleness. And yet here again we will undertake the defence of

the Russian clergy; for who, in fact, could require an act of heroism of a

man “enervated by excess of moral and physical sufferings, deprived of the

faculty of action, and not only possessing no longer any energy, but

having also lost all belief in his own powers”? Now, this is, word for

word, the condition of the Russian priest, as depicted by his most zealous

defender.

“But,” it may be said, “the Orthodox Church is not confined to Russia; the

orthodox priest will find brethren in Austria, in Roumania, in Turkey, and

in Greece.” This is true; but it is not enough to find brothers only. The

Russian priest will need brother‐martyrs; and where will he find them?

Besides, strange to say, the various branches of the Orthodox Church live

almost strangers to each other, unless some political interest awaken the

sentiment of fraternity in their common faith. Without entering into

details on this point, we will only make one remark. It is easy to find

several histories of the different branches, taken separately; but is it

so easy to find an universal history of the Orthodox Church?(170) In

Catholic countries the reverse of this is always the case; it is,

comparatively, difficult to meet with particular histories of the Catholic

Church in France, in Italy, in Germany, etc.; but everywhere is found and

taught the universal history of the Catholic Church—a history in which

that of a nation, however great or powerful, figures, if not as an

episode, certainly as but a simple portion, a contingent part, of a

necessary whole.

We one day read in an English journal that has a wide circulation the

following remark: “A church which counts among its members men like

Archbishop Manning and Dr. Newman is a church which is not to be

despised.” English common sense thus did justice to the “coal‐heavers’

faith,” as people are pleased to call the adhesion of Catholics to the

doctrines proposed to them by their church. In fact—to speak only of the

last named of these two personages—the author of the _Grammar of Assent_

does not yield in intellectual power to any of his Anglican adversaries;

from whence we may infer, by a series of logical deductions, that neither

does he yield in this to any of the adversaries of the Catholic Church. To

speak plainly, we have never perceived that these adversaries have shown

any alarming degree of intelligence, at least with regard to the

application of the rules of logic. In any case, as, since Porphyry and

Celsus, men have never been wanting who have represented the faith

propounded by the Catholic Church as an abdication of reason, so also,

since Justin and the first Christian philosophers, the church has never

lacked doctors who, in defending her, have at the same time been the

defenders of reason. The apostolate of learning is not less fruitful,

perhaps, than that of virtue and of martyrdom. Without pronouncing upon

the relative necessity and advantages of these three apostolates, nor

examining whether it is possible to exercise a _true_ apostolate by

learning unaided by self‐denial and virtue, nor even doing more than call

to mind how God in the Old Law, and the church in the New, have always

made learning a part of the duty of a priest, we will confine ourselves to

remarking that many souls are led to embrace the faith, and others,

tempted to doubt, are quieted and confirmed, by a simple reflection

analogous to that of the English journal just quoted. “A faith,” they say,

“professed by minds so much above the ordinary class as such and such a

writer ought not to be lightly rejected.” It is a preliminary argument of

which the effects are salutary, and grace does the rest.

If we now take into account all that eighteen centuries and innumerable

writers of all lands have accumulated in the way of proofs and testimonies

in favor of the Catholic faith; and if we at the same time consider the

immense variety and the infinitely‐multiplied forms of error, each in its

turn combated by the church, we shall comprehend that it is scarcely

possible to imagine any error of which the refutation has not already

somewhere appeared. In the same way the struggle still goes on in all

parts of the globe, and among peoples who have advanced, some more, some

less, in learning and civilization; in all parts of the globe the defence

also continues, and by men brought up among the same surroundings as their

adversaries. In short, Catholic productions are not the exclusive appanage

of any single diocese, any single country, any single nation; they are the

family treasures, belonging to the whole Catholic Church. Facility of

communication brings us, together with their names, the works of those who

are waging war against various errors in various lands. To take time, to

enquire, to make some researches—this is the worst that could happen to a

Catholic priest who might find himself, for the moment, unable to solve an

objection. But the objection is already solved, even if it be drawn from

some scientific discovery of yesterday, if indeed (as it often happens) it

cannot be solved at once by the simple use of common sense, and especially

of logic, the most necessary of sciences, and the least studied of all.

Thus we see what happens in the Catholic Church, and we see, therefore,

why it is that in those countries where formerly the clergy may have been

at times taken by surprise, and not well prepared to meet a sudden

adversary, they now struggle bravely; and also we see why earnest

Catholics have been able without difficulty to distinguish between true

and false progress, and between true science and false.

Will it be the same in Russia?

We do not wish to exaggerate anything, and will even admit that the

complaints which are so general of the ignorance of the Russian clergy may

be much overstated. Nevertheless, in looking through the bibliography of

that country, we find ourselves forced to acknowledge that whenever the

day shall arrive for unbelief to have free course there, decorated with

the seductive appellations of science, of progress, of the emancipation of

reason, etc., the Russian clergy will either find themselves without arms

wherewith to defend orthodoxy, or with such only as shall prove

insufficient.

In fact, the reader is perhaps not aware that, from the year 1701, Peter

the Great had been _obliged_ (according to Voltaire) to forbid the use of

pen and ink to monks. “It required,” says the apostle of science, “an

express permission from the archimandrite, who was responsible for those

to whom he granted it. Peter willed that this ordinance should

continue.”(171) The successors of Peter likewise willed the same, although

we do not venture to affirm that the ordinance is still observed. Let us,

then, be just, and refrain from blaming the Russian monks. If, since the

time of Peter the Great, they have not extraordinarily enriched the

literature of their country, the fault is none of theirs.

Neither have we any right to blame the secular Russian clergy if few

writers have appeared among them, nor yet any one of those whose name

alone exercises an apostolate. All the Russians who have written on the

ecclesiastical schools of their country are unwearied in their complaints

against the badness of the method and the insufficiency of instruction

which the young Russian levite takes with him on leaving the

seminary.(172) We do not in any way accuse the commissions charged with

the inspection and reformation of the ecclesiastical schools. We are

convinced that these commissions have done their best; if the evil still

continues as before, it is because they have not the power to touch its

root. Besides, how can it be expected that a priest, poor, burdened with a

family, and in very many cases necessitated to maintain himself and his

family by the work of his hands, can either have the necessary freedom of

mind or sufficient leisure to devote himself to study?

It remains for us to consider the bishops. These are taken from the

monastic orders, and if, since Peter I., all of them have not been

archimandrites, yet to all has, at any rate, been granted by the

archimandrite, of their convent, at his own risk and peril, the use of pen

and ink. Of the two hundred and eighty ecclesiastical writers who have

appeared and died in Russia from the conversion of that country to

Christianity down to the year 1827, and whose biographies may be found in

the _Dictionary_ of Mgr. Eugenius, Metropolitan of Kief,(173) one hundred

and ten belonged to the episcopate; and ever since 1827 that episcopate

has continued to reckon among its members men remarkable for their

learning. Everything, however, is relative. These bishops have shone in

Russia; and there has been a desire to make them shine as far as France by

translating into French the _Orthodox Theology_ of Mgr. Macarius, Bishop

of Vinnitsa; a collection of _Sermons_, by the late Mgr. Philarete,

Metropolitan of Moscow; and perhaps some other works. It is also to be

supposed that some care must have been shown in selecting from amongst the

productions of ecclesiastical literature in Russia, the best there were to

be found of what she possessed. Without criticising, we think there is

reason for saying that hitherto the Russian episcopate has not by its

writings furnished orthodoxy with a support proportioned to the dangers

with which it is threatened, and we doubt very much whether it will be

equal to furnishing her with it very quickly. The Russian prelates

renowned for their learning are but few in number; besides, so long as the

faith and the church are protected by the Penal Code, and judicial

prosecution would be the consequence of any attack, neither priests nor

bishops have much chance of finding themselves face to face with any

adversaries of importance. The latter, in fact, would be exceedingly

careful to avoid the men who could denounce them; and the result of this

is that, for want of exercise, neither the bishops nor priests can state

what is either their strength or their weakness. To this we must add the

thousand hindrances placed by Russian censorship to the manifestation of

religious thought. There is nothing, even to the sermon preached by the

pope in his parish, which must not be submitted to censure.(174) As for

pastoral letters of bishops, we should be very glad if any could be quoted

to us. The formalities and delays which accompany the revision and

approbation of every work destined to appear in print are of a nature to

discourage the most intrepid. The examination of _all_ the ecclesiastical

productions destined to appear in the immense empire of the czars is

confided to the committees of the _four_ ecclesiastical academies of Kief,

Kasan, Moscow, and St. Petersburg. If no exceptions were allowed, at any

rate in favor of periodical works, the complaint of Jeremias might be

truly applied to Russia: _Parvuli petierunt panem, et non erat, qui

frangeret eis_—“The little ones asked for bread, and there was none to

break it for them” (Lament. Jer. iv. 4). Finally, we will not stop to

consider the manner in which ecclesiastical censorship is exercised in

Russia, nor yet its tendencies nor its object; but we say, to single out

one point only, that it is impossible to find in all Russia a single work

that is able to throw any light upon the reciprocal relations of the

church and state. More than one reader will join us in acknowledging that

in Russia a true, apologetic literature has yet to be created.

To complete the picture of that which will inevitably take place in Russia

on the day when the Orthodox Church shall there lose the support of the

Penal Code, and will have to struggle alone, and abandoned to her own

strength against heresy and unbelief, we ought to observe that, since the

general confiscation of the goods of the clergy which was effected under

Catherine II. (1762), the Russian Church has no longer anything to supply

its needs but that which is allowed it by the state. It is the state which

provides for the keeping up of churches and monasteries; the state which

furnishes the expenses of the orthodox worship, and which assigns to the

ministers of that worship the piece of land from which they must find a

maintenance for themselves and their families, or else which supplies them

with a salary proportioned to the functions they are to exercise. It is

not, after all, impossible that, in the day of which we speak, the state,

while continuing to retain a budget for the orthodox worship, may

nevertheless extraordinarily reduce it; and also it is not impossible that

conditions which cannot be conscientiously accepted will be attached to

the payment of the salary, already so moderate, of the ministers of this

church. In either case, more even than to combat heresy and unbelief, it

will be necessary for the Russian Church to consider how her priests and

their families are to find bread and shelter. Now, the only classes which

can then effectively help them—are they not the same which at this day

show so great a contempt for their popes?

And this is not yet all. In the day of which we speak who will secure to

the bishops the obedience of the secular clergy? This clergy trembles now

before them, because it sees them armed by the law with a despotic

power;(175) but no one can foresee what will happen in the day when popes

and bishops shall be equal before the law. The bishops being all drawn

from the monastic state, the result has been that hitherto the secular

clergy have lived in subjection to the regular; and this fact, united to

other causes, has created a powerful antagonism between these two orders

of the clergy, which not unfrequently betrays itself by venomous writings.

One portion of the press makes common cause with the secular clergy; and,

if we may judge by certain tendencies, the admission of the secular clergy

to the episcopate will probably be one of the consequences of the changes

that will take place in the relations between the church and state. But it

is not possible that this change can be peaceably effected; the disorders

which, at times, arise in the application of the principle of universal

suffrage, show, in some degree, how, in this case, various elections of

bishops would be brought about. And then, in the confusion and wild

disorder of conflict, where would be found the authority which could have

power to settle these differences and claim for itself adhesion and

respect? The bishops, moreover, who or a century and a half have all been

equal before the czar, and only distinguished by the titles and

decorations granted or refused according to the good pleasure of the

monarch—will these submit themselves to an archbishop, to a metropolitan,

to a patriarch—in a word, to one from amongst themselves? Will they, for

the love of concord, invest him with a superior authority, and obey him?

And were they to reach this point, would not St. Petersburg contest the

primacy with Moscow? And would Kief forget her canonical jurisdiction of

former times?

Yet more, would not Constantinople vindicate any right over Russia? And

the other Oriental patriarchs—would they forget that their concurrence was

formerly sought for the erection of the patriarchate of Moscow, and their

approbation to sanction the establishment of the Synod?

We may thus, in its principal features, behold the state to which the

czars have reduced the faith and the church of which they entitle

themselves the guardians. The picture is a gloomy one; nevertheless, we do

not believe that we have exaggerated anything. Before proceeding further

we would even say a word of excuse for the czars.

If the Catholic Church were not built upon a rock, proof against all

tempests, many a Catholic sovereign designated by appellations indicative

of the highest degree of attachment to the church would long ago have

reduced her to the same condition as the church of the czars.

To Be Continued.

The Bells Of Prayer.

During the prevalence of the great plague at Milan, “at the break

of day, at noon, and at night a bell of the cathedral gave the

signal for reciting certain prayers which had been ordered by the

archbishop, and this was followed by the bells of the other

churches. Then persons were seen at the windows, and a confused

blending of voices and groans was heard which inspired sorrow,

not, however, unmixed with consolation.”

Stern Death, the tyrant, had swept along

With trailing robes through the dusty mart.

And laid his hand, that is white and chill,

On the city’s heart.

The Lombard City of olden ways

Over its sorrow and wild despair

A cry sent up to the unseen Throne

In an earnest prayer.

A lord that is dead as a peasant is,

And a peasant dead is as a lord;

The angel stood at the city’s gate

With his lifted sword!

The tongues of bells in the steeple‐tops

Sent on the breath of the baleful air

A call for the people far and near

To evening prayer.

At the sound of bells the weeping ceased,

The heart of the thousand stilled its moan,

The name of God was uttered aloud

With the bells’ sad tone.

And the gleaming crosses pointing up,

Like the gold of crowns that princes wear,

Seemed in the gray of the changeless sky

As signs of prayer.

And the women’s eyes were wet with tears,

Their desolate souls were wrung with pain,

For the dead asleep in their silent graves

Through the sun and rain.

In the dawn and noon and dusk it rose,

Threading its way up the narrow stair—

The Catholic cry—when the bells were rung

For the people’s prayer.

New Publications.

THE PRISONERS OF THE TEMPLE; OR DISCROWNED AND CROWNED. by M. C.

O’Connor Morris. (Eleventh volume of Father Coleridge’s _Quarterly

Series_.) London: Burns & Oates. 1874. (New York: Sold by The

Catholic Publication Society.)

This is a republication with additions of papers from that excellent

magazine, _The Month_, which is especially valuable for its historical

articles. It gives an account of the imprisonment of Louis XVI. and his

family in the old tower of the Templars, together with sketches of other

parts of the history of that noble and unfortunate group of victims to

atheistic and revolutionary fury. The chief interest centres in the

history of Louis XVII., commonly called the Dauphin. The tragic tale of

his horrible sufferings and death is minutely told. At the end of the

volume we have a report of the judgment in the famous case of the

Naundorffs, who pretended to be the heirs of the Dauphin. This is one of

the many tales of an escape of the Dauphin from the Temple and the

substitution of another child in his place. The utter falsity of all these

stories is amply proved, pretenders and prophets to the contrary

notwithstanding. Whoever looks to the branch of the Capets for the

deliverance of France must find him in the Count de Chambord. We cannot

too warmly recommend this charming and pathetic narrative to all our

readers.

MEDITATIONS ON THE LIFE AND DOCTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST. By Nicholas

Avancinus, S.J. Translated from the German Edition of the Rev. J.

E. Zollner, by F. E. Bazalgette. With a Preface on Meditation, by

George Potter, S.J. 2 vols. London: Burns & Oates. 1874. (New

York: Sold by The Catholic Publication Society.)

The _Meditations_ of Avancinus were specially adapted to the use of

religious. The German editor modified them for the use of all persons

indiscriminately. They are prepared for every day in the year, are short,

simple, and well fitted for use, both in community and in private.

THE NOBLEMAN OF ’89. By M. A. Quinton. Translated by Prof. Ernest

Lagarde, of Mt. St. Mary’s College. Baltimore: Kelly & Piet. 1874.

Some of our readers have doubtless read the _Quatre‐Vingt‐Treize_ of that

great magician of language and fiery genius of revolution, Victor Hugo. It

is an apology for the French Revolution; yet, to any person whose mind and

heart are not already corrupted by bad principles and passions, it must

seem like an apology which makes the crime worse and less excusable. The

romances of Erckmann‐Chatrian are more subtle and plausible. One or two of

them are, if taken singly, quite inoffensive, and a translation of them

was some time ago given in our own pages on account of their vivid

illustration of most interesting historical epochs. A contributor, quite

unsuspectingly, even proposed to translate them all, and the necessity of

reading the whole set before accepting the proposition, first opened our

eyes to the scope and object which their authors have always had in view,

and which is exposed in some very plainly; as, for instance, in

_Waterloo_, the sequel to _The Conscript_. The end of these writers is to

extend and popularize hatred of the church, the clergy, and the classes

enjoying wealth or power in the state; to foster the spirit of liberalism

either in its extreme or moderate form, and thus to help on the

revolution. The influence of such books teaches us a valuable lesson

concerning the polemic strategy to be employed on the opposite side.

Historical romances have an extraordinary charm for a multitude of

readers, and they can be made the vehicle of conveying historical

knowledge together with the valuable lessons which history teaches. In

order that they may perfectly fulfil their highest purpose, they should

present true, authentic history, using fiction merely as an accessory. M.

Quinton has done this, and has given a correct and vivid historical sketch

of one period in the French Revolution, which is included in the plot of a

novel of genuine dramatic power and descriptive ability. Its size is very

considerable, making a volume of eight hundred pages, closely printed in

quite small type. Fearful as the scenes are through which we are hurried

in following the adventures of the persons figuring in the story, we are

not left without some compensation and alleviation in the episodes of

quiet life which relieve its tragic gloom. Some charming characters are

portrayed, the best of which are three individuals of low station but high

heroism—Louisette, Drake, and Cameo.

The characters of Marat, Danton, Robespierre, Philippe Egalité, and other

leaders of the Revolution, are well portrayed. The author’s special

success, however, is in describing the low ruffians who led the mob in the

work of assassination. Maillefer, Lepitre, Boulloche, and Ratfoot are like

Dante’s demons. We have never read anything more infernally horrible than

the description of Aunt Magloire and the band of women who were trained to

yell at the royal family. We recommend the perusal of this description

most especially to the strong‐minded young ladies who are inclined to

dabble in infidelity. In Mme. Roland they may see themselves as they are

now; in Aunt Magloire and her frenzied band they may see where womanhood

is brought by the abandonment of faith, when the lowest stage of

degradation is reached.

The translator has done a great service to the public by putting this

admirable historical novel into English. We take the liberty of

recommending to him another one—M. Barthelemy’s _Pierre le Peillarot_. The

multiplication of such books will go far to counteract the evil influence

of those which falsify history and instil bad principles. We have vainly

endeavored to persuade some of our publishers to undertake the translation

of Conrad von Bolanden’s historical novels, which are far superior to the

heavy productions of Mühlbach. If these latter, in spite of their dulness,

obtained so extensive a circulation, why not the admirable works of

Bolanden which depict the thrilling scenes of the Thirty Years’ War? A

series of small, popular histories of certain important epochs is also

very much wanted.

PURGATORY SURVEYED, ETC. Edited by W. H. Anderdon, S.J. Reprinted

from the edition of 1663. London: Burns & Oates. 1874. (New York:

Sold by The Catholic Publication Society.)

The original of this treatise was written in French by Father Binet, S.J.

As it now stands it is the work of Father Thimelby, S.J., who used the

work of Father Binet as a basis for his own. It is quaint, rich, and in

one respect more directly practical as a spiritual book than some other

excellent treatises on the same subject, inasmuch as it shows the pious

reader how to avoid purgatory.

LESSONS IN BIBLE HISTORY FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. By a Teacher. New

York: P. O’Shea. 1875.

Experienced teachers usually prepare the best school‐books. The compiler

of these Bible lessons is a lady of remarkable talent, who has spent many

years of most successful labor as a teacher in an academy for young ladies

which deservedly enjoys the highest reputation. Her book is one which has

been prepared during this long course of teaching, and thus practically

tested, as well as continually improved. It is now published with the

direct sanction of his Grace the Archbishop of New York, after a careful

revision made under his authority. The author has not attempted to go into

questions of difficult critical erudition in respect to chronology and

similar matters, but has simply followed the commonly‐received

interpretation of the text of Scripture history, where there is one,

avoiding the difficulties and doubtful topics which beset the study of all

ancient history, sacred as well as profane. In this respect she has shown

uncommon tact and judgment, and has always kept in view her true object,

which is to prepare a text‐book suitable for young pupils of from ten to

fifteen years old. The style and method are admirable for brevity,

clearness, and a graphic, picturesque grouping of events and characters.

The delicacy with which every narrative, where immoral and criminal acts

are involved, shuns the danger of shocking the innocent mind of children

by contact with evil of which it is ignorant, is exquisite. The questions

about morals which necessarily suggest themselves to the quick,

inquisitive minds of children, and which the author has often had to

answer in class, are solved prudently and correctly. The interval between

the sacred history of the Old Testament and that of the New has been

filled up from profane authors, particularly Josephus, which is a great

addition to the value of the book, and throws light on the narrative of

the Gospels that makes it much more intelligible. In the history of the

life of Christ the words of the evangelists are for the most part

employed, without other changes or additions than such as are necessary to

make the narrative continuous. The parables are arranged by themselves in

a series. A summary of the Acts of the Apostles concludes the work, which

is of very moderate size and copiously illustrated by woodcuts. As a

school‐book this is the best of its kind, in our opinion, and we expect to

see it generally adopted in Catholic schools. We cannot too cordially

recommend it to teachers and parents for their young pupils and for family

reading. Many adults, also, will find it the best and most suitable

compendium of Bible history for their own reading; and even if they are in

the habit of reading the sacred books themselves in their complete text,

this manual will aid them to gain a better understanding of their

historical parts than they can otherwise obtain. We trust the good example

set by the pious and accomplished author will be followed by many of her

associates in the holy work of religious education, to the great advantage

of both teachers and pupils. Thousands of lovely children whom she will

never see this side of heaven will bless the hand that has prepared for

them so much delightful instruction, even if their curiosity is never

gratified by knowing her name.

EXCERPTA EX RITUALI ROMANO. NOVA ET AUCTIOR EDITIO. Baltimore:

Kelly, Piet, et Soc. 1874.

This is a lovely little ritual, a very pretty present for any one to make

to a priest, especially to one just sent out from the seminary to a poor

and arduous country mission.

LETTERS OF MR. GLADSTONE AND OTHERS. New York: _Tribune_ Office.

1874.

The London _Tablet_ epigrammatically remarks that Mr. Gladstone kindled a

fire on a Saturday which was put out on the following Monday. Mgr. Capel

has very satisfactorily answered him. Every person not an ignoramus in

theology and jurisprudence, knows that the Catholic Church teaches the

derivation of the state from a divine institution _immediately_, and _not_

mediately through the church; moreover, that she teaches what follows by

logical sequence, the duty of allegiance to the state. No Christian, no

moral philosopher, and no person holding the principles on which the

American fabric of law is based, can hold that this allegiance is

unlimited.

The New York _Herald_, remarkable both for extraordinary blunders and for

extraordinarily just and sensible statements, has well said that there is

a “higher law” recognized by every one who believes in the supremacy of

conscience and duty to God. It is a very base and inconsistent thing for

an American to profess a doctrine of blind, slavish obedience to civil

magistrates and laws, however wicked these may be. The Catholic Church has

always claimed to be the infallible judge in morals as well as in faith.

The Pope has always exercised the supreme power of pronouncing the

infallible judgments of the church, and the Vatican decrees have added

nothing to that power. They have embodied the perpetual doctrine of the

church in a solemn judgment with annexed penalties, as an article of

Catholic faith; and, in consequence, whoever refuses obedience and assent

to that judgment is _ipso facto_ a heretic and excommunicated. It is

therefore idle for Lord Acton and Lord Camoys, who have stained their

nobility and their Catholic lineage by an act of treason and apostasy, to

pretend to be Catholics. They are no more Catholics than is Mr. Gladstone,

and the English Catholics have repudiated them and their doctrine with

indignation. It is futile to pretend that the Pope claims any _jure

divino_ temporal power directly over states or citizens in their political

capacity, or pretends to retain any _jure humano_ sovereignty beyond his

own kingdom. The reader will find the general subject of this notice

discussed at greater length elsewhere in this number.

OUTLINES OF ASTRONOMY. By Arthur Searle, A.M., Assistant at

Harvard College Observatory. 16mo, 415 pp. Boston: Ginn Brothers.

1874.

A new interest has within the past few years been given to the science of

astronomy by the recent discoveries which have been made in it,

principally by the use of the spectroscope and by the new field which has

been opened and which is still opening before astronomers, of physical

research into the construction of the celestial bodies. A short time ago

the science seemed nearly as complete as it was ever likely to become;

now, while retaining its old ground intact, it is rapidly developing new

resources, and, besides being itself perfected, it is contributing no

small share to the solution of the great problem of the day in purely

physical science—the constitution of matter.

Many new and excellent works have, accordingly, as might be expected,

lately appeared on the subject, called forth by the reawakened interest in

it, both in the world at large and among scientific men. The book forming

the subject of this notice is certainly one of the best of these.

It is not a mere condensed summary of what is known and has been

discovered. Such summaries, of course, are of great utility, both for

reference and as text‐books, and serve excellently in the latter way, if

the object of the learner be to memorize for a time a large number of

facts, or, in other words, to cram for an examination. They may serve, for

students of good memories, even a permanent purpose; but they require

close application, and labor under the difficulty—too often a fatal one—of

not being interesting, unless helped out by startling representations of

nebulæ, comets, clusters of stars, and other beautiful objects at which

many people seem to suppose astronomers to spend their lives in idly

gazing.

Fine writing, on the other hand, about the grandeur and magnificence of

the celestial orbs, etc., is indeed often interesting; but, though

edifying and useful in its way, it fails to instruct. One really knows

little more after it than before.

This book has to a great extent, and perhaps as far as possible, avoided

both of these difficulties, which usually stand in the way of people who

wish to know something of astronomy, but not to become practical

astronomers. It is more on the plan of Herschel’s treatise than of any

other which we remember, but is, though this is saying a good deal,

superior to it in two respects. One is, as is obvious, that it is brought

up to the present state of the science; and the other, that in the first

part the geometrical diagrams usually considered necessary are dispensed

with, and supplied by ingenious popular illustrations borrowed from facts

of daily life, and familiar to all, which attract, instead of terrifying,

the reader. It is true that the fear which most people have of mathematics

is to a great extent unreasonable; but allowance must be made, even for

ill founded prejudices. Illustrations and explanations of this kind, for

which the author has a remarkable talent, are a feature of the book

throughout.

The last half of it is intended for those who have a real desire to

understand the work which astronomers do, and how they have done it; the

nature of the problems which they have to solve, and the means employed.

It does not presuppose any really mathematical education; what geometry is

needed is explained as it is required, and with a great deal of

originality, as we may observe by the way. But to this branch of the

subject there is no admission, except by Newton’s key of “patient

thought.” Those who do not care to use it must dispense with the knowledge

to which it opens the door. The chapter on the “History of Astronomy” is,

however, easy reading, and much the best short sketch of the progress of

the science of which we are aware.

The illustrations are excellent, not being copies on a traditional type,

but taken from photographs or careful original drawings. A copious index,

appended to the book, facilitates reference.

The work is mainly intended for the general reader; but there is no reason

why it should not be a text‐book, especially for academies and colleges,

as Sir John Herschel’s, already alluded to, has proved to be. We have no

hesitation in recommending it for this purpose, and as being worthy to

take the place of any now in use.

We regret that the words on page 384, expressing a mere hope in the

existence, or at any rate in the providence, of God as the author of

nature, should have been inserted. We have not noticed anything else in

the book to which Catholics can object, unless it be the use of the word

infinity in the sense common to Protestant authors, which is, in fact, the

one ordinarily given to it by mathematicians.

THE TESTIMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS EXAMINED BY THE RULES OF EVIDENCE

ADMINISTERED IN COURTS OF JUSTICE. By Simon Greenleaf, LL.D., late

Dane Professor of Law in Harvard University, author of “Treatise

on the Law of Evidence,” etc. New York: James Cockcroft & Co.

1874.

Prof. Greenleaf’s reputation as a writer on jurisprudence is too well

known to need any comment from us. In bringing his judicial calmness and

legal acumen to bear on the Christian evidences, he has conferred an

obligation which all Christians must acknowledge. He writes as a Christian

scholar should write, with learned gravity, yet with reverent simplicity;

and as he believes the divinity of Our Lord, and raises no disputed point

of doctrine, his work may be accepted as orthodox. It is in reading the

productions of such minds as his that the really ephemeral character of

works like Renan’s _Life of Jesus_ is best appreciated. Renan holds a

brief, and his arguments in support of it are only flowery and superficial

rhetoric. Renan’s _scenes_ are very dramatic—the apparition of our Lord to

Magdalen, for instance, is worked up with great elaborateness of effect;

but when he comes to face solid evidence, he fails most deplorably. Thus,

in treating of Our Lord’s appearance to the apostles after his

resurrection, and the conviction of the doubting Thomas, he merely says

that at the first interview S. Thomas was not present, adding in a

careless way: “It is said (_on dit_) that eight days afterward he was

satisfied.” A cavalier way this of disposing of a most circumstantial

piece of history!

This ample and elegant volume is a new edition of a work published, we

believe, some thirty years ago, and now out of print. One of the best

parts of the book is the Appendix, containing, among other things, M.

Dupin’s “Refutation of Salvador’s Chapter on the Trial of Jesus.”

SINS OF THE TONGUE; OR, JEALOUSY IN WOMAN’S LIFE; followed by

discourses on rash judgments, patience, and grace. Boston: Patrick

Donahoe. 1874.

THE VALIANT WOMAN: A series of discourses intended for the use of

women living in the world. Boston: Patrick Donahoe. 1874.

Two very practical books written by Mgr. Landriot, late Archbishop of

Rheims, and translated from the French by Helena Lyons. After having

passed through four editions in England, Mr. Donahoe presents them to us

in an American dress for circulation and perusal in this country. The

print is clear, the translation good, and the binding in keeping.

Both of these books will be found very useful to clergymen who have the

spiritual direction of women living in the world, and will assist them in

preparing sermons to decry those most mischievous of sins: envy, jealousy,

rash judgments, and sloth.

Although these books were written for females, yet they will be very

beneficial to many of the opposite sex, who are not unfrequently in great

need of cultivating reserve and charity. The first one, particularly, may

be read with advantage by some writers for the press, who seem to forget

that calumny, detraction, and vituperation are mortal sins, which are even

more aggravated when published to the world than when only privately

indulged in, and that, moreover, they exact reparation.

ORDO DIVINI OFFICII RECITANDI MISSÆQUE CELEBRANDÆ, JUXTA RUBRICAS

BREVIARII AC MISSALIS ROMANI, ANNO 1875. Baltimore: apud Fratres

Lucas, Bibliopolas, via vulgo dicta Market, No. 170.

We beg pardon for having misquoted the title of this work. The title‐page

contains the word “Rectandi,” which we have supposed to stand for

“Recitandi,” and “Celebrande,” for which we have substituted “Celebrandæ.”

It would be well if the mistakes in this important publication were all on

the title‐page, and if they were all merely misprints. We will, however,

begin with these. The proofs do not seem to have been read at all.

The following, then, are some of the misprints. Feb. 4, “S. Andræ

Corsini.” Feb. 10, “_Dom. Possion_.” Mar. 10, “_A cunctus_.” Mar. 20,

“_fucit heri_” and “_præsente Candav_.” Mar. 28, “DOM. RESURECT.” This

last is, if we remember rightly, an old acquaintance. Apr. 13, “S.

Hemenegildi.” May 2, “S. Anthanasii.” May 5, “_præsente caduv_.” May 19,

“S. Prudentianæ.” May 23, “Festum SS. Trinitatatis.” The superfluous “at”

here has perhaps come out of “_Matut._,” on June 8, which reads “_Mut._”

June 13, “Vesp.”

These will suffice as specimens of mere typographical errors. The

following cannot be considered as such:

On January 16 we find the feast of S. Marcellinus. The Breviary has

Marcellus. Similarly, on July 13, we have S. Anicetus for S. Anacletus.

The feast of S. John Nepomucen has disappeared altogether. Unless it has

been suppressed, it should have the day to which that of S. Francis

Caracciolo has been transferred. This requires the following changes:

June 15. For S. Francis Caracciolo read S. John Nepomucen.

June 17. For S. Ubaldus read S. Francis Caracciolo.

June 18. For S. Bernardine read S. Ubaldus.

June 22. For S. M. M. of Pazzi read S. Bernardine.

June 23. For the Vigil of S. John read S. M. M. of Pazzi.

The assigned feast of S. Leo comes, it would seem, this year, on July 3.

Until now it has been on July 7. Moreover, we do not find it in the

Breviary on the 27th of June, as stated this year, but rather on the 28th,

as previously.

We must do the _Ordo_ the justice to say that it has itself corrected one

of its mistakes. It put in the feast of S. Justin on the 14th of April,

and has inserted a slip saying that this is only for the Roman clergy.

Cannot we have a better _Ordo_ next year? It has been getting worse and

worse for some time. And if we have a change for the better, would it not

be a good idea at the same time to separate the part peculiar to the

Diocese of Baltimore entirely from the rest, for the convenience of the

clergy? Since writing the above, our attention has been called to the

omission of the anniversaries of consecration of some of our bishops.

There may be some other errors; it is not probable that we have noticed

all.

REGLEMENT ECCLESIASTIQUE DE PIERRE LE GRAND. Par le R. P. C.

Tondini, Barnabite. Paris: Libr. de la Soc. Bibliogr., 75 Rue du

Bac. 1874.

F. Tondini has sent us two copies of this curious and valuable document,

for which he will please accept our thanks. It contains the text of the

_Regulation_ in Russian, Latin, and French, with other pieces and notes,

and is prefaced by an introduction. There is a great deal of political

talent and skill exhibited in this code of the Russian Peter, which is the

foundation upon which the modern schismatical Church of Russia is founded.

There are also many things in it most whimsical and amusing. The Emperor

Paul wanted to celebrate a Pontifical Mass in vestments of sky‐blue

velvet. Peter did not care about performing any such childish escapade as

this, but he was resolved to exercise the governing power of a supreme

pontiff, and he carried his resolve into execution. The one salient

feature of his regulation is the systematic effort to degrade the

hierarchy and clergy of the Russian Church, to make them impotent and

contemptible. The able despot, aided by his unscrupulous instruments,

succeeded but too well. The ultimate result has been that Russia is worm‐

eaten and undermined by infidelity and its necessary concomitant, the

revolutionary principle. There is no salvation for it, even politically,

except in a return to obedience to the See of Peter, the Prince of the

Apostles. Our Episcopalian admirers of the Russian Church will find some

wholesome reading in this interesting and learned work of F. Tondini.

SADLIERS’ CATHOLIC DIRECTORY, ALMANAC, AND ORDO FOR THE YEAR OF

OUR LORD 1875. New York: D. & J. Sadlier & Co. 1875.

In the cursory glance we have been able to give this publication, we are

glad to notice an evident effort to improve on the issues of previous

years. We do not look for perfection in such difficult compilations, and

anything approaching it is to be commended.

IERNE OF ARMORICA. By J. C. Bateman. New York: D. & J. Sadlier &

Co. 1874.

This work, reprinted from Father Coleridge’s admirable _Quarterly Series_,

was noticed, at the time of its original publication, in THE CATHOLIC

WORLD for June, 1873. We have also received from the same house: Moore’s

_Irish Melodies_, with memoir and notes by John Savage; Carleton’s

_Redmond Count O’Hanlon_, _The Evil Eye_, and _The Black Baronet_; the

latter reprints, we believe, of works heretofore published by Mr. Donahoe

of Boston.

THE MILWAUKEE CATHOLIC MAGAZINE, January, 1875.

We welcome to our table this new contemporary, an octavo monthly of

thirty‐two pages, just come to hand. The editor having beautified the

churches and dwellings of his locality with the productions of his pencil

and crayon, now takes up the pen professional; though he has heretofore

made occasional contributions to the press, which have recently been put

into book‐form. He brings to his task a refined, poetic taste, a genuine

appreciation of the beautiful in art and nature, and a sturdy good sense,

which will doubtless serve him well in his new relations. We wish him all

success.

ANNOUNCEMENT.—The Catholic Publication Society has in press, and will soon

publish from advance sheets, two very important works in answer to Mr.

Gladstone’s late pamphlet; one by the Very Rev. John Henry Newman, D.D.,

and the other by His Grace Archbishop Manning. The former is entitled _A

Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, on the occasion of Mr. Gladstone’s recent

Expostulation_, and the latter, _The Vatican Decrees and their Bearings on

Civil Allegiance_.