On another occasion he was with them at a great distance from home,

when the alarm was given that the English were within a few hours'

march of the encampment. All insisted on his flying back to the

village. At daybreak he started with two Indians as his escort. The

journey was long, the provisions were out, and the father had for his

only food a species of wood, which he softened by boiling. In crossing

a lake, which had begun to thaw, he narrowly escaped being drowned

himself in his effort to assist another. Saved from this danger, he

was not the less exposed to death from cold. On the following day

they crossed the river on broken pieces of ice, and were soon at the

village. He was welcomed back by a sumptuous feast, consisting of corn

and bear's meat; and when he expressed his astonishment and thanks

for such a banquet, the Indians replied: "What, father! you have been

fasting for two days; can we do less? Oh! would to God we could always

regale you so!" But while he was thus feasting, his children elsewhere

were mourning over his supposed death. His deserted cabin on the shore

led some, who knew nothing of his flight, to believe that he had been

killed. One of these erected a stake on the banks of a river, and to

it attached a piece of paper-birch bark, on which he had drawn with

charcoal a picture of some English surrounding F. Rale, and one was

represented cutting off the Black Gown's head. When the main body of

the Indians came that way, and saw the pictorial writing, its meaning

sank deep into their hearts, and they were overwhelmed with grief. They

tore out the long scalp-locks from their heads, and then sat on the

ground around the stake, where they remained motionless and without

uttering a word till the next day. Such was their mode of manifesting

the most intense grief. But what must have been their joy, when, on

returning to the village, they saw their beloved father reciting his

Office on the banks of the river!

It would appear, from a letter in the _Massachusetts Historical

Collections_, attributed to F. Rale, that he accompanied the expedition

that destroyed Berwick. It is quite evident, from what has been related

of the determination of the English to destroy him, and of the repeated

efforts they made to accomplish that deadly purpose, that F. Rale would

not have been safe at Norridgewock or anywhere apart from the main

body of his people. It is not likely that his devoted children, who

saw his danger, and were solicitous for his safety, would permit him

to remain behind, exposed to the constant attempts of his enemies upon

his life. His presence in the expedition against Berwick was enough,

with his enemies, to confirm their charge that he led them on to war

against the English. The truth is, their own pursuit of him rendered

his presence there justifiable, as necessary for his own safety, if it

were not justifiable on the ground that he was their chaplain in war

as in peace, and that his presence among them was more necessary for

the religious consolation of the dying, as well as for moderating, by

the counsels we have already seen him giving them, the usual cruelties

of war. It does not become his accusers, however, to dwell upon this

charge, who themselves have boasted of the warlike feats of the Rev.

Mr. Fry, who scalped and killed his Indian in Lovell's expedition, and

was killed fighting in the thickest of the engagement.

It has already been seen how the Indians were, by repeated injuries,

driven at last to take up the hatchet. When once at war, they

prosecuted it with terrible energy and destructive fury. And though

their humanity on several occasions contrasted with the cruelty of

their civilized antagonists, the young settlements of New England

suffered much at their hands during this contest.

In the summer of 1724, hostilities on the part of the Indians had begun

to moderate, and peace was already spoken of between the respective

parties. But this did not restrain the fury of the English. On the

23d of August an expedition of little over two hundred, consisting of

English and their Mohawk allies, rushed suddenly from the thickets

upon the unconscious village of Norridgewock. The first notice the

Indians received was the rattling of the volleys of their assailants

among their bark cabins. Consternation seized upon the inhabitants;

the women and children fled, but the few braves who were then at the

village rushed to arms to defend their altar and their homes. The

struggle was indeed a desperate one. F. Rale, when he perceived the

cause of the excitement in the village, knew that himself was the chief

object of the enemy's pursuit. Hoping, too, to draw off the fury of the

assailants from his neophytes upon himself, he went forth. No sooner

had he reached the Mission Cross, where the fight was raging, than a

shout of exultation arose from two hundred hostile voices, and, though

a non-combatant, a discharge of musketry was immediately levelled at

his venerable form. Pierced with balls, he fell lifeless at the foot

of the cross. Seven principal chiefs lay dead around their saintly

pastor and devoted father. The battle was now over, but the victory

seemed too easy for the victors; they approached to wreak further

vengeance upon the lifeless form of F. Rale. They hacked and mutilated

the corpse, split open the head, broke the legs, and otherwise brutally

disfigured it. Then proceeding to the house of God, the assailants

rifled the altar, desecrated the sacred vessels and the adorable

Host, and then committed the church to the devouring flames. After

the English had retired, some of the orphaned flock of Norridgewock

returned to their desolated home; they first sought for the body of

their good father, and, having found it, they piously interred it

beneath the spot where the altar stood.

After reading the incidents of the life of F. Rale, the reader would

be astonished to peruse the accounts given by New England writers. But

the latter bear on their face the evidence that they were the result,

not of candid investigation, but of the bitterest partisan prejudice.

There may be some explanation of their tone, though no voucher for

their accuracy, in the fact that Penhallow derived his accounts from

interpreters, who were known not to be faithful. Charlevoix and De

la Chasse knew F. Rale personally, and they give us the strongest

assurances of his innocence, his sanctity, and his many heroic virtues.

M. de Bellemont, Superior of the Sulpician Seminary at Montreal,

entertained so exalted an opinion of his merits that he did not

hesitate to apply to him the words of S. Augustine: "Injuriam facit

martyri, qui orat pro eo."

The accounts hostile to F. Rale have been derived chiefly from

Penhallow, who was actuated by the strongest party feeling. A single

specimen from his pen will show how he felt towards the person, as

well as the religion, of F. Rale; it contains a repetition of the

old calumny about the merit of destroying heretics, which no educated

person would in our day repeat: "We scalped twenty-six besides M. Rale,

the Jesuit, a most bloody incendiary, and instrumental to most of the

mischiefs done us by preaching up the doctrine of meriting salvation by

the destruction of heretics. He even made the offices of devotion serve

as incentives to their ferocity, and kept a flag on which was depicted

a cross surrounded by bows and arrows, which he used to hoist on a pole

at the door of his church when he gave them absolution previous to

their engaging in any warlike enterprise." Now, the flag that awakened

so much horror in the breast of the New England chronicler was a simple

Indian Sunday-school banner, than which nothing could have been more

innocent. F. Rale, artist as well as priest, had decorated his Indian

church with pious paintings executed by himself, to excite the piety

and zeal of his neophytes. Amongst other similar representations,

suitable for pleasing the simple tastes of the natives, was the flag in

question, ornamented with the cross and the arrow, emblems of the faith

and of the country. A glance would have convinced any passer-by that it

was the banner of an Indian church, and no sensible person in our day

could object to see such an one used by the Indians of Florida, Oregon,

or other hostile Indian country within our territory or bordering on

our frontier.

Dr. Francis, who in his life of Rale follows by preference the New

England accounts, sums up his estimate of our missionary's character as

follows: "But whatever abatements from indiscriminate praise his faults

or frailties may require, I cannot review his history without receiving

a deep impression that he was a pious, devoted, and extraordinary man.

Here was a scholar, nurtured amid European learning, and accustomed

to the refinements of one of the most intellectual nations of the Old

World, who banished himself from the pleasures of home and from the

attractions of his native land, and passed thirty-five years of his

life in the forests of an unbroken wilderness, on a distant shore,

amidst the squalid rudeness of savage life, and with no companions

during those long years but the wild men of the woods. With them he

lived as a friend, as a benefactor, as a brother; sharing their coarse

fare, their disgusting modes of life, their perils, their exposures

under the stern inclemency of a hard climate; always holding his life

cheap in the toil of duty, and at last yielding himself a victim to

dangers which he disdained to escape. And all this that he might gather

these rude men, as he believed, into the fold of the church; that he

might bring them to what he sincerely held to be the truth of God and

the light of heaven."

Mr. Bancroft thus describes the life and character of the subject

of this memoir: "At Norridgewock, on the banks of the Kennebec, the

venerable Sebastian Rale, for more than a quarter of a century the

companion and instructor of savages, had gathered a flourishing village

round a church, which, rising in the desert, made some pretensions to

magnificence. Severely ascetic--using no wine, and little food except

pounded maize, a rigorous observer of the days of Lent--he built his

own cabin, tilled his own garden, drew for himself wood and water,

prepared his own hominy, and, distributing all that he received, gave

an example of religious poverty. And yet he was laborious in garnishing

up his forest sanctuary, believing the faith of the savage must be

quickened by striking appeals to the senses. Himself a painter, he

adorned the humble walls of his church with pictures. There he gave

instruction almost daily. Following his pupils to their wigwams,

he tempered the spirit of devotion with familiar conversation and

innocent gaiety, winning the mastery over their souls by his powers

of persuasion. He had trained a little band of forty young savages,

arrayed in cassock and surplice, to assist in the service and chant the

hymns of the church; and their public processions attracted a great

concourse of red men. Two chapels were built near the village, one

dedicated to the Virgin and adorned with her statue in relief, another

to the guardian angel; and before them the hunter muttered his prayer

on his way to the river or the woods. When the tribe descended to the

seaside in the season of wild fowl, they were followed by Rale; and on

some islet a little chapel of bark was quickly consecrated."

The scene so peaceful, so happy, so beautiful, in the days of F.

Rale, that it has been appropriately called one of "nature's sweet

retirements," is described by the poet Whittier after the rude hand of

war had blasted its beauty and destroyed its altar and its priest, as

it appeared to some Indian warriors who revisited the field after the

battle, in the following lines:

"No wigwam smoke is curling there,

The very earth is scorched and bare;

And they pause and listen to catch a sound

Of breathing life, but there comes not one,

Save the fox's bark and the rabbit's bound;

And here and there on the blackened ground

White bones are glistening in the sun.

And where the house of prayer arose,

And the holy hymn at daylight's close,

And the aged priest stood up to bless

The children of the wilderness,

There is naught but ashes sodden and dank,

And the birchen boats of the Norridgewock,

Tethered to tree, and stump, and rock,

Rotting along the river-bank!"

FOOTNOTES:

[165] Indian name Kanghéssanak; botanical, Umbilicaria Muhlenbergii.

[166] Francis' _Life of Rale_, in Sparks.

[167] _Maine Hist. Soc. Collections_, v. i. p. 339, and _Shea_.

[168] Francis' _Life of Father Rale_.

[169] Smith's _History of New York_.

[170] _Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections_, v. viii. p. 258.

[171] _Sillery._

[172] _Shea._

[173] Francis's _Life of Rale_.

[174] _Chalmers._

[175] Francis's _Life of Rale_.

FROM EGYPT TO CHANAAN.

My God, while journeying to Chanaan's land,

For peace I do not pray;

Nor seek beneath thy sheltering sweetness, Lord,

To rest each circling day.

I cry to thee for strength to struggle on,

But do not ask that smooth the way may be;

Sufficient for thy servant 'tis to know

That earth's bleak desert ends at last with thee.

When heavenly sweetness floods my heart, dear Lord,

I magnify thy name;

When desolations weigh my spirit down,

I bless thee still the same.

Keep me, O God! I cry with streaming eyes,

From love of earth and creatures ever free:

Far sweeter are than Eden's fairest blooms

The blood-stained blossoms of Gethsemani.

I do not ask of thee that loving friends

Should wander by my side,

Or that my hand should feel an angel's touch,

A guardian and a guide.

But, Israel's God, do thou go on before,

An ever-present beacon in the way;

A fiery pillar in dark sorrow's night,

A cloudy column in my prosperous day.

I do not ask, O Master dear! to lean

My head upon thy breast;

Nor seek within thy circling arms to find

An ever-present rest.

I beg from thee that crown of prickly thorn

That once thy sacred forehead rudely tore;

And I will press those crimsoned brambles close

To my poor heart, and ask from thee no more.

But when, at length, my scorched and weary feet

Shall reach their journey's end,

And I have gained the longed-for promised land

Where milk and honey blend;

Then give me rest, and food, and drink, dear Lord;

For then another pilgrim will have past,

As thou didst, o'er the wastes of barren sand

From Egypt into Chanaan, safe at last.

THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 1873.

Will a new year ever dawn? is the question that must present itself

in some shape or form to the one who glances at the records of the

years as they go by. Eighteen hundred and seventy-three of them have

passed since that song was heard at midnight on the mountains of Judea,

"Glory in the highest, and on earth peace"; yet to-day the chant is

as new and strange as it then was. There is no pagan Rome, but there

is a Christian Germany; the dead ashes of the divine Emperor Tiberius

were long ago blown about the world, but the divine Emperor William

lives; there is no Herod, but there is an Emanuel, whose name is as

characteristic of the man as the word _Eumenides_ of what it was

intended to represent. Who shall say that there are no Pilates still,

who would fain wash their minds of conviction and their hands of the

blood of Christ with a little water? Are none living who cast lots for

his seamless garment? Every person, everything existing at the birth

and death of Christ, has its living counterpart to-day; which is to

say that human nature is still human nature; that the last chapter of

the world's history has not yet been written; and that, beautiful and

sublime as parts of it may be, "the trail of the serpent is over it

all."

The year now closing is bigger with portent than event, as far, at

least, as events touch humanity at large. A glance at the principal

states of the world, east as well as west, though with a drowsier

movement in the Orient, will bring before the eye many of the same

symptoms throughout; more or less of transition, of rapid and

often violent national change, which naturally shows itself among

peoples of a thousand creeds in the relation of the governed to the

governing, of the individual to the state. On this subject there are

two extremes--personal absolutism, on the one hand, and communism, on

the other. Both are equally disastrous to humanity, both are opposed

to the law of Christ; hence the believer in the law of Christ, the

individual who founds and builds his life and that of his family on the

law of Christ--the Christian, the Catholic--is equally objectionable to

both, and alike an object of hatred to Prussian imperialism and French

liberalism. We are living in dangerous times; the world seems at the

crisis of a fever. God in his mercy grant that it pass safely, and that

the patient awake from the long delirium to its senses and the road to

recovery, however slow and toilsome!

In American history the year of our Lord 1873 will probably be known

as, thus far at least, pre-eminently the year of scandals. Early in

this year, the Congress of the United States, as if in emulation

of the example set by some of our state legislatures and municipal

corporations, did, in the now famous Crédit Mobilier transaction,

furnish a chapter apart in the annals of political malfeasance and

corruption. It shocked and shook the confidence of the nation. The

out-going Vice-President escaped impeachment by a vote so narrow as to

imply a conviction of his guilt; his successor entered with the shadow

of the same offence on his character. The rank-and-file were worthy

of their leaders. Men stared blankly in each other's faces, and asked

whether such a thing as honor existed in political life. The result

showed itself in general apathy at the elections, while the tide, such

as it was, turned again to the opposite party.

Corruption, fraud, embezzlement--embezzlement, corruption, fraud!

Such are the chief headlines which the future historian will find in

the national annals during this year of grace. The same story is as

true of private individuals as of our public and representative men.

The fashionable crimes of the year--always after murder and suicide,

of course--have been embezzlement and defalcation on the part of

gentlemanly and well-educated bank and insurance officers. A batch of

American citizens gave us a world-wide celebrity by their long trial,

ending in conviction and severe punishment, for astounding forgeries on

the Bank of England; so that it is doubtful, as matters stand, which

epithet would convey the severest imputation on character--"As honest

as a cashier," or "As honest as a member of Congress."

The early spring was signalized by, perhaps, one of the last efforts

of the Indians against the whites. A small band of Modocs, under the

leadership of their chieftain, "Captain Jack," who seemed to have

had serious causes of complaint, after considerable negotiation,

resolved to die in harness rather than wait for what, to them, was a

lingering death on a narrow reservation. They commenced operations

by treacherously murdering Gen. Canby, a brave officer, and a peace

commissioner, during a peace parley. Retiring to their caves, which

afforded them an admirable shelter, they for a long time maintained a

successful resistance to the United States forces despatched to destroy

them, inflicting severe loss on the troops. So successful was Captain

Jack's battle that at one time it was feared the other tribes would

rise and join him. Run to earth at last, he surrendered with one or two

companions who remained faithful. After due trial, they were taken and

hanged. A poor issue for a Christian government!

Troubles loomed in Louisiana. Faction contended with faction for the

government at a sacrifice of many lives. When blood once flows in

civil strife, it is hard to tell where or when it will stop. As civil

war threatened, and as Congress was not sitting, President Grant was

compelled to resort to the expedient of ordering in the United States

troops, not only to preserve the peace, but to sustain one of the

parties in power. The country looked with a natural jealousy on this,

at the time, apparently necessary movement; for if all civil quarrels

are to be decided by federal bayonets, centralization and consequent

personal government must sooner or later ensue. At the same time, it

is impossible to allow local contests to be fought out _vi et armis_.

If the states cannot conduct their internal affairs in a civil fashion

and in the spirit of the constitution, there is apparently no medium

between centralization and disruption.

The South was making rapid strides towards commercial recovery; the

cotton crop for the year was excellent, as, indeed, were the crops

generally; but the recent financial disasters have crippled trade as

well as commerce. People will neither buy nor sell. Stock lies idle

in the market; large business firms close or suspend, and the farmers

cannot forward their products; so that the country is faced by a long

winter with nothing to do, aggravated by a bad business season, for

which the strikers of the preceding year have themselves partially to

blame; and all ostensibly because one large banking firm suspended

payment!

The only remedy for everything is a restoration of confidence among

all; but that is the precise thing that is slow to come. The money

market has been in the hands of commercial gamblers and tricksters

so long that, with our paper money, which in itself is demoralizing,

commercial gambling seems to be the acknowledged and legitimate line of

business. Honest men cannot contend with a world of rogues. American

credit has suffered terribly. If in political affairs it be true,

as Prince Bismarck assured the world no later than last March, that

"confidence is a tender plant, which, once destroyed, comes never

more," it is doubly true in matters affecting a man's pocket.

There is something ominous as well as startling in this sudden collapse

of all business, all commercial transactions, in a young, wealthy,

powerful country such as this, in consequence of the failure of one

or two men. It could not be unless the roots of the evil that wrought

their failure had taken wide and deep hold of the national heart. There

are dangers more immediate and more fatal than Cæsars or centralization

threatening our republic. There is something like a rotting away of

the national virtue, purity, and honor which in themselves constitute

the life of a nation. When we find dishonesty accepted as a fact, or a

state of affairs rather, against which it is hopeless to contend; when

we find money accepted as the lever which Archimedes sought in vain,

and that money itself based on nothing--paper--taken on trust, which

does not exist, we have arrived at a state very nearly approaching

to national decay, and it is high time to look to our salvation.

This can be brought about only by an adherence to the doctrines of

Christianity, an education of our children in the laws of Christianity,

so as to save at least the coming generation. Only one thought will

save a nation from dishonesty: the consciousness that a dishonest

action is a sin and a crime against Almighty God. When that doctrine

is taught and enforced in our public schools, and impressed indelibly

on the plastic mind of innocence, the generation will grow up honest,

true, and manly. While perfectly aware that reasoning of this kind

will scarcely be appreciated "on the street," nay, would not even be

understood, that is no reason why prominence should not be given it by

those who have the future of their country at heart. The generation

that grows up without a Christian education will not know the meaning

of such words as private or commercial morality.

The history of the year in Europe is told in a sentence written long

before Rome was founded: "The kings of the earth stood up, and the

princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ." In

Germany, the work of the construction and consolidation of the new

empire is advancing bravely. The new German Empire is founded on a

military code strengthened by penal statutes, executed with all the

promptness, vigor, and rigor of military law. The great feature of

the year has been the passing of the ecclesiastical bills, into the

particulars of which question it is unnecessary to enter now, as it

has already been dealt with at length in THE CATHOLIC WORLD.[176] The

present aspect of affairs may be summed up in a sentence: To be a

Catholic is to be a criminal in the eyes of the state.

Every Catholic society of men, and women even, living in community

together, have been expelled from Prussian territory within the year,

for the simple reason that they were Catholics. As an excuse in the

eyes of this keen, honest, liberal world of the XIXth century for such

an outrage on human liberty, the government which boasts as its head

Prince Bismarck, whose very name has become a byword for sagacity

and foresight, contents itself with no better reason than that these

quiet men and women, whose lives are passed out of the world, are a

danger to the nation that conquered Austria and France; and the keen,

honest, liberal world finds that reasoning sufficient. To be logical,

the government should expel all the 8,000,000 Catholics in Prussia, or

the 14,000,000 in the Empire, who are left behind; for there is not

one shade of difference in the Catholicity of the societies expelled

and that of the vast body remaining. But as it would be a difficult

undertaking bodily to expel 14,000,000 of human beings from an empire,

and as it would be a costly proceeding in the end, the half a dozen or

more men who legislate for this vast empire of 40,000,000 do the best

they can under the circumstances, and strain their ingenuity to devise

means for purging Catholicity out of the souls of this vast body, as

though the religion of Jesus Christ were a fatal disease and a poison.

Consequently, the first thing to do was to change the Prussian

constitution, which guaranteed religious freedom independent of state

control. By an alteration in Articles XV. and XVIII., religion was

brought under complete subjection to the state: Prince Bismarck being

compelled to pack the Upper House with his creatures in order to secure

a majority for the measure. It passed, and its result, as far as the

Catholic Church is concerned, is easily told.

Catholic bishops, the successors of the apostles, may no longer

exercise apostolic jurisdiction without permission from a Protestant

government. A Catholic bishop may not excommunicate a rebellious

Catholic without permission from a Protestant government, under the

severest penalties.

A Catholic bishop must, under pain of the severest penalties,

acknowledge a schismatic as a priest; retain him in his parish, pay him

a salary, and allow him to say Mass and preach false doctrine to his

Catholic congregation.

A Catholic bishop may not, under the severest penalties, ordain a

Catholic priest, unless the candidate for holy orders receive the

approval of Protestant government officials.

Catholic seminaries, where students for the Catholic priesthood are

trained, must accept the supervision of a Protestant official and the

programme of education prescribed by a Protestant government, which

has declared war against their religion. If the bishop does not accept

these conditions, the seminary is closed.

Catholic candidates for holy orders cannot be exempted from military

service; the term of military service embraces a period of twelve years.

Catholic candidates for orders may not be admitted to holy orders

before passing three years at a state university under the lectures of

Protestant or infidel professors. On their entrance to the university

they must matriculate to the satisfaction of those professors, and

on leaving it they must pass a rigorous examination, also to the

satisfaction of those professors.

A Catholic bishop may not appoint to or remove a Catholic priest from

any parish without the permission of the Protestant government. If he

does so, the marriages celebrated by such a priest are not recognized

by law, and the children are consequently illegitimate in the eyes of

the law! This too under a government which recognizes and encourages

by every means in its power civil marriages, without the form of any

religious ceremony whatsoever. Surely this is an _Evangelical_ power!

Such, in brief, is a sketch of what these ecclesiastical bills mean.

The sketch, hasty and incomplete as it is, requires no comment.

A running comment is kept up every day, as readers may see for

themselves, by cable despatches announcing penalties inflicted upon

this bishop and that for refusing to obey laws that not only the Gospel

of our Lord Jesus Christ and the apostolic writings forbid him, under

pain of losing his soul, to obey, but against which the heart of any

man with an ounce of freedom and honesty in his nature must revolt as

from a foul offence. But the cable tells not a tithe of the story.

Every penalty of the law in all the cases mentioned above has been

and is being rigorously, nay bitterly, enforced; and a milder mode of

treatment is scarcely to be looked for from the recent return of Prince

Bismarck to the Prussian premiership, with full control this time over

the cabinet.

It is difficult, in these days and in this country of all others,

to write or speak with calmness of this cool assumption of absolute

power over soul and body--the souls and bodies of 40,000,000 of human

beings whom God created--by one or two men, and of its hypocritical

justification by appeals to the Deity himself.[177] It is still more

difficult to speak or write with calmness of the undisguised or ill

disguised approval which such barbarous enactments have evoked in free

America in the columns of Protestant religious or quasi-religious

journals. Is religious freedom one thing here and another thing in

Germany? Or is this country indeed, as some allege, ripe for absolutism?

The spirit that would wipe out the church of Christ if it could, that

stifles every breath of religious freedom, naturally and as a matter

of course laughs at such a thing as pretensions to political freedom

in any sense. Consequently, it was no surprise to see, in the face of

the protest of the majority, the civil as well as foreign polity of

the states that compose this German Empire, scarce yet two years old,

transferred to the bureau that sits at Berlin. These states were free

three years ago, governing themselves by their own laws. They must now

be ruled internally as well as externally by the laws of the empire,

that is to say, by Prussia; for the imperial chancellor is the Prussian

premier, with full control over the cabinet. In a word, Germany is to

be Prussianized. Prince Bismarck is no lover of half-measures. Already

it was decreed, in spite of opposition, that the Prussian military code

should serve for the whole empire. The bill for the organization of the

imperial army retains the main features of the former organization.

The term of military service is fixed at twelve years, and, as

already seen, not even the orders which indelibly stamp a man as the

consecrated priest of God, can save him from becoming a man of war.

Now, this one item of itself is sufficient to condemn this government

in the eyes of humanity. What is the meaning of the words, "twelve

years of military service"? Prussian military service is no playing

at soldiers, be it remembered, like our militia here or in England.

The average life of a man in these days probably does not much

exceed thirty-six years. Yet in this new German empire the men who

go to compose its 40,000,000 of human souls are compelled to devote

one-third--the best twelve years of their lives--to what?

To serve in the armies of a tyrannical despot, who styles himself

"William, by the grace of God"--to spend those best twelve years of

their lives in learning the most expeditious method of killing their

fellow-Christians! And that is what the glorious German Empire means.

What wonder that Germans should already fly in such numbers from this

glorious and consolidated empire as to cause the same government that

forbids freedom of religion to prohibit freedom of emigration? As all

the world has seen, the German government is compelled to throw every

obstacle in the way of its subjects to prevent their flying to this

country. Does that betoken soundness, and a government grateful to

the people? In the face of that one fact, it is needless to call to

mind the riots that have continued at intervals throughout the year

in various parts of the country, and the cruelty with which they were

put down. What wonder that, even in the face of a military power, the

Catholic party, persecuted as it is, should have gained, on Protestant

concession, a small but decided increase on the vote of last year?

What wonder that the liberty of the press should be attacked, and the

journals that dared to publish the Papal Allocution confiscated?

It has been alleged all along that Catholics have been the foes of the

unity of Germany. The allegation is utterly false. It is alleged by the

Prussian government that they conspire against the empire, from the

bishops down. Give us the proofs, say the Catholics; lay your finger

on the words or the acts of conspiracy. The government refuses to take

up the open, manly challenge. It knew that its charge was false. But

had it, by any chance, been true, who shall say that a government that

enforces such barbarous laws as those above given, which is compelled

to resort to force in order to keep its subjects in the country, which

compels every man to devote the best part of his life to preparation

for war, whose revenues go only to swell vast armaments and fortify

frontiers, which denies not only all religious but all political

freedom--practically one and the same thing--is not a curse rather

than a blessing to mankind? The German Empire, as it stands to-day, is

nothing else than a rampant, military Prussian despotism--a danger not

only to its sister nations in Europe, but to the world.

In Italy the story is much the same; and the wonder is the sufferance,

in these days of vaunted enlightenment and freedom, of the utter

violation and disregard on the part of governments of every human

right, even to the seizure of private property. The bill for the

appropriation by the state of church property passed through the

Italian parliament. These fine words, "appropriation," "parliament,"

"debates," in this "house" and in that, seem to throw dust in the

eyes of men who, when their own property is touched, are particularly

keen-sighted, though the "appropriation" go not beyond a single dollar.

This high-sounding measure simply means that the Italian parliament

has forcibly taken possession of three millions' worth and upwards of

property to which, in the face of earth and heaven, it had not one jot,

one tittle, one shade of claim in any form.

Three years ago, the present Italian parliament--Italian by

courtesy--was not known in Rome. The Pope was as much a sovereign as

Victor Emanuel. The withdrawal of the French troops left the Sovereign

Pontiff defenceless, and let in the King of Sardinia. Unprovoked

and uninvited, he took violent possession of the slender remnant of

the Papal States left to the Pope, and proclaimed himself King of

Italy--the Pope still remaining on the soil which his predecessors

owned and governed before the race of Victor Emanuel existed. Under the

Papal rule, certain religious corporations--the religious orders and

societies--rented, purchased, or owned certain property. The property

belonged to those corporations as surely and as sacredly as property

can belong to any man or body of men. Of course, when this Italian

government laid its sacrilegious hand on the domain of the Vicar of

Jesus Christ, it was scarcely to be expected that, with the example

of Henry VIII. of England and, more recently, of William of Prussia

before its eyes, it would stop short at the property of religious

corporations. Consequently, we hear of a bill for the appropriation of

this private property by the state. It is debated, and, after the usual

objections to what is already a foregone conclusion, the property is

seized by the state, and the owners turned adrift over the world.

When men, and by no means admirable men, calling themselves

governments, play thus fast and loose with every vested right,

Catholics are told, because they are so bold as to defend their own,

that they are and, cannot be other than disloyal to that nowadays

obscure thing, a state! The Vicar of Jesus Christ lifts up his voice,

and, after his many warnings, pronounces the solemn sentence of

major excommunication on all who have had hand, act, or part in these

sacrilegious transactions, which the science of jurisprudence itself

condemns utterly--and free men, with sound ideas on the rights of

property, whatever may be their opinion on the rights of religion, find

in his utterances insolence or ravings.

Treasures of art, libraries that are historical relics, relics of the

sainted dead, all that the monasteries and convents held, flood the

Italian market, and are bought up "for a song"; while the property

itself is up at auction to the highest bidder. And what has this

government done for the country? Has it, in a manner, justified its

seizure by improving the condition of the people?

It only needs to read any of the Roman correspondents of the English

or American press to know that never did brigandage exist in a more

flourishing condition in Italy than since the entry of Victor Emanuel

into Rome. Many Protestant correspondents, be it remembered, intimate

plainly enough that the authorities wink at the brigands. Capture, of

course, is made once in a while; but so occasionally as only to serve

"_pour encourager les autres_." But, after all, there is no barometer

like a man's pocket; and the rise and fall of taxation is a very safe

indicator of the state of the political mart. On this point a little

comparison will be found instructive.

The _New York Herald_, in the spring of this year, in an article

entitled "The Debts of the State--Important Questions for Taxpayers,"

mentions, as the revelation of "a startling fact," that "the aggregate

debt of the several counties, cities, towns, and villages of the

State of New York, for which the taxpayers are responsible, exceeds

two hundred and fourteen million dollars. This is more than ten and

a half per cent. upon the assessed valuation of all property in the

State.... If to this total debt of the subdivisions of the State be

added that of the State itself, ... we have as the entire corporate

debt of the State $239,685,902--almost twelve per cent. of the whole

assessment of property." "This is a heavy encumbrance upon every

man's and every woman's estate. It has grown out of a long course of

reckless abuse of power, too lightly confided to legislative and the

various representative bodies which control the State in its several

divisions. Lavish extravagance has been too often authorized in

expenditures for the public account, by men who carefully guard their

private interests and credit, and it is no secret that many of the

burdens imposed upon the taxpayers have enriched those who made the

appropriations. How are these onerous obligations to be met? Or are

they to be paid at all?"

It is doubtful whether many of the taxpayers in New York State will

feel inclined to call in question the strictures here involved. At

all events, the ex-Tammany chieftain has recently been consigned

to the penitentiary. Turn we now to the taxation in Rome since the

commencement of the Emanuel _régime_. A _Herald_ correspondent, who was

despatched to describe the death of our Holy Father, and the election

of his successor, and, finding his time heavy on his hands--as the

Pope, in the face of an outraged world, refused to die before his

Master called him--collected and sent back the following little items:

_Comparative Table of Taxes on an Annual Income of 70,000 Lire

(Francs) paid in 1869 to the Pontifical Government, and in 1873

to the Italian Government._

TAXES PAID TO THE PONTIFICAL GOVERNMENT.

Francs. Per Cent.

State taxes on property in

Rome, 467.20

State taxes on property in the

country, 248.75

------

Total, 715.95 or 1.02279

Communal taxes on property

in Rome, 864.95

Communal taxes on property

in the country, 613.70

--------

Total, 1,478.65 or 2.11236

Total of all taxes paid under

the Pontifical Government, 2,194.60 or 3.13515

TAXES PAID TO THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT.

State taxes on property in

Rome, 6,250

State taxes on property in

the country, 940

-----

Total, 7,190 or 10.62857

Communal taxes on property

in Rome, 4,650

Communal taxes on property

in the country, 651

-----

Total, 5,301 or 7.57286

Income taxes on 59,497 francs 7,854 or 11.22

Mortmain taxes on total of

70,000 francs, 2,800 or 4.00

Mortmain on buildings which

give no rent, but are taxed, 1,500 or 2.14286

----- -----

Total of all taxes paid under

the Italian Government, 24,645 or 35.56429

SUMMARY.

Increase

of Taxes

Pontifical Italian under

Government. Government. Italian

Gov't.

Per Cent. Per Cent. Per Cent.

State tax--real estate, 1.02 10.63 9.61

Communal and

provincial taxes 2.11 7.57 5.46

Income tax, -- 11.22 11.22

Mortmain, -- 4.00 4.00

Mortmain on buildings

not paying rent, -- 2.14 2.14

---- ---- ----

Total, 3.13 35.56 32.43

This schedule refers only to clerical property.

This is an increase of 32½ percent., or, not including the extra tax on

mortmain property, 28½ per cent., within, at the time of writing, about

two years.[178] Would the taxpayers of New York, who are presumably

more wealthy than those of Rome, consider such an increase of taxation

as that in two or three years "a startling fact"? And what is there

to show for it? Absolutely nothing. All sorts of fine schemes for

improvement of the city and such like are in existence--upon paper;

unfortunately, they remain there. There is a grand new opera-house

to be built, however. That is something. And then those royal visits

to Austria and Germany must have cost something. And Victor Emanuel

himself and his worthy son Humbert lead rather expensive lives. In

the account of New Year's Day at Rome, a twelve-month since, we find

the president of the chamber requesting his majesty to take more care

of his health. And his majesty in response acknowledges the necessity

of so doing, while he assured the president that arrangements existed

which would ensure that the unity and liberty of Italy would in no case

be endangered.

And here the Roman correspondent of the London _Times_, who, like most

special correspondents of that journal, hates the Pope and the Papacy

with a solid Saxon hatred that not even what is passing under his own

eyes can remove, furnishes us with a little further information on the

same point:

"The rigorous exaction of the taxes, referred to in former letters, has

been a great element of discontent, especially in the south, which has

suffered in many respects from the formation of the Italian kingdom.

The only chance of rescuing the country [What country?--The exchequer

of Victor Emanuel.] from its severe financial difficulties and probably

from bankruptcy, was in such an exaction, but it has not the less

pressed very cruelly on many needy classes. And it must be owned that,

instead of seeking to soothe the sufferings of the taxpayers, Signor

Sella has rather increased them by his cynical mode of treatment.

People think it bad enough to be mulcted until they have scarcely

enough left to live upon, and are not in a mood to be made game of

also"--and much more in the same strain.[179]

Of the banishment of the religious orders and societies from Italy,

which recently came into effect, the same only can be said as of the

German expulsion. Our Holy Father, in receiving the generals of the

various religious orders on January 2, said in reply to their address:

"It is the third time during my life that religious orders have been

suppressed. These corporations have always been the support of the

church, and it is a dispensation of God that they should from time to

time undergo such vicissitudes. This is a secret of Providence which I

may not unravel, but I strive to see whether an angel may not be coming

to aid the church. I do not say that I desire the destroying angel who

visited the host of Sennacherib in order to save the chosen people of

God. No, I have not that thought. I wish for an angel who might convert

all hearts. We are in exile; we must come before God with the powerful

arm of prayer, in order to obtain, if not what we wish, at least some

assuagement of our misfortunes."

At the beginning of summer the world was excited by a rumor of the

Pope's sickness unto death, and it was curious to observe the effect

of the rumor upon the non-Catholic world. Pius IX. has already seen

more than "the years of Peter." He has sustained in his own person

the trials of Peter. But whatever the end may be which Jesus Christ

has reserved for the close of the glorious career of his true Vicar,

Pius IX. will leave this world, his soul borne up on the prayers and

blessings of two hundred million hearts, while his name will for ever

shine resplendent on the glittering scroll of the successors of Peter.

"On his return from Versailles, M. Thiers was greeted at the railway

station by a crowd which was awaiting him there with loud cries of

_Vive M. Thiers! Vive le Président!_" So runs a despatch from Paris on

New Year's Day, 1873. How oddly it reads now! _Le Président est mort:

Vive le Président!_ M. Thiers is politically as dead as he that was

laid in his quiet grave at Chiselhurst in the first month of the year.

It almost requires a strained effort of the mind to recall the fact

that a short year ago M. Thiers was the master of the situation in

France, receiving deputations and congratulations on New Year's, and

talking of his presidential visit to the Vienna exhibition. A quiet but

significant little despatch of the same date may partly explain the

rapid collapse of M. Thiers: "Many persons of political distinction

left their names at the residence of the Orleans princes." THE CATHOLIC

WORLD for last January, in its review of the year 1872, said on the

French question: "But Thiers cannot last, and what is to follow? The

country would not bear the rule of the man of Sedan.... The speech of

the Duc d'Audiffret-Pasquier, on the army contracts, killed Napoleonism

for the nonce. We can only hope for the best in France from some other

and nobler sprout of former dynasties; we cannot foresee it."

It is needless to tell here the story of how M. Thiers was overthrown,

or to comment on it, beyond the timeworn illustration that as a

rule it is a radical mistake for any one man to set himself up as a

necessity for a nation; yet such a mistake is the commonest indulged

in by rulers (_in esse_ or _in posse_, as may be). In the midst of

intense excitement in that most excitable of capitals, Paris, Marshal

MacMahon was summoned by the majority of the Assembly to succeed M.

Thiers. He placed himself as an impersonal instrument in the hands of

the government, promising by the aid of "God and the army" to guarantee

peace. He chose a conservative government. Order has been kept. The

last farthing of the indemnity to Germany has been paid, and the last

German soldier has quitted France.

A volume might be written on those few words--the indemnity has been

paid: the last German soldier has quitted France. There is nothing but

silent wonder for this marvellous feat, which in its way casts into the

shade even the German conquest of France. A nation whose armies were

one after the other shattered in a few months, an empire destroyed,

an emperor led into captivity; its great fortresses beaten down, its

capital besieged and taken twice over, first by the foe, after by its

own soldiers from the hands of its suicidal children; two provinces,

rich and fair, with their cities and peoples, amounting to a million

and a half, taken away; its raw levies scattered into mist at a ruinous

waste of life and money; its government overthrown and the entire

national system overturned, so that men turned this way and that, and

nowhere found a ruler. Men, money, provinces, cities, emperor, empire,

rulers--all gone; commerce destroyed, the heart of the nation sore

with resentment and stricken with sorrow: and all this crowded into

a few months! Yet within less than three years this fickle, false,

degenerate French nation--for such was the general character attributed

to it after the late war--has restored its armies, has maintained

peace, although even yet it can scarcely be said to have a permanent

government, has set its commerce again afloat, and has rid itself of

the foe at a cost that, when proposed, the whole world deemed fabulous.

One cannot help wondering now whether Prince Bismarck was prescient

enough to foresee that France could afford to pay the fabulous sum

for which he stipulated--more than a billion dollars. The figures are

easily written down on paper, the words slip glibly from the lips, yet

they signify a sum of money whose immensity, and the power that it

contains for good or for evil, it is well-nigh impossible for the mind

of man to conceive. When first bruited, the whole world looked aghast

and refused to consider the idea that Prince Bismarck, especially

after what the nation had suffered, could stipulate for the payment

of so vast a sum--one that simply implied national bankruptcy. The

world misjudged Prince Bismarck, and possibly he misjudged the power

and vitality of the nation that lay quivering under his iron heel, or

he might have demanded more. Yet here two years afterwards the almost

impossible sum is told out to the last farthing, and the Germans are

over the border again, with their gripe still on two French provinces,

hastening fast to fortify and defend them from attack.

With what France has accomplished in these short months before our

eyes, how irresistibly the thought comes to one--would it not have been

wiser, truer patriotism, a loftier statesmanship, to have left those

two provinces to France, and not hold them up for ever before her eyes

as the fairest prize pitilessly wrung from her in her hour of anguish?

Has not Prince Bismarck, or the Emperor, or Von Moltke, or whomsoever's

doing it was, left the germ of future wars as a legacy to be fought by

those yet unborn, when they shall be rotting in their graves?

A month or two ago, and the crown that once belonged to his race seemed

to offer itself to the grasp of the Count of Chambord. Our readers

know the story too well to repeat it here. All that need be said is,

he refused it. Henri Cinq is very unlike Henri Quatre, the founder of

his race. That Protestant gentleman deemed a throne worth a Mass; his

Catholic descendant deems a throne insufficient to compensate him for

a broken word or a wavering in principle. It is a lesson to kings;

and if there be such a thing as royalty in these days--royalty as men

once knew, or thought they knew, it--surely it belongs to the man who

could quietly turn aside from a crown within his reach when he could

not wear, as the brightest jewels therein, truth and honor untarnished.

Verily Henri Cinq is the most royal of the Bourbons, and the line of

crowned heads is redeemed in the person of their crown-less descendant.

_Vive la France! Vive Henri Cinq!_

The crown which all felt to be virtually offered to him being refused,

the conservative government, with MacMahon at its head, still remains

in office, and a provisional government is voted for seven years. It

is doubtful whether it will live that time. France is still open to

eruption. Yet the present government deserves well of the country. It

has shown itself wise, calm, and moderate. The debt was paid off, and

the nation scarcely seemed to recognize the fact. How that vast sum of

money was collected so rapidly and transferred to Berlin, where it came

from, and how it was brought together at so short a notice, without any

one apparently feeling the worse for it, is, and will probably remain,

one of the mysteries of finance.

It is as impossible this year as it was last to forecast the French

horoscope. The nation has accomplished wonders, and shown itself

capable of everything save choosing a government which could

satisfy the whole body. Probably such a government is impossible.

Republicanism, in our sense of the word, is as far off from France as

ever. Sooner or later some man will again possess himself of the power

in France, unless, as is still not improbable, _the nation_ invite the

Count of Chambord. The Duc d'Aumale has "won golden opinions from all

sorts of men," and continues to win them. He is conducting the trial of

Marshal Bazaine with great keenness and discretion.

"The man of Sedan" went to sleep at last as the year opened. He is

reported to have died a Christian death, though the evidence of

adequate reparation for his past crimes is wanting. Whatever he may

have been, he left many close personal friends behind him. He did more

than this: he left a party, or the germ of one, in that fatal legacy of

the "Napoleonic idea," to his young son, who, if his life be spared,

will probably guard it well, and follow closely in the footsteps of his

father, if he have the chance to do so, which God forefend! His English

education will not harm him; and he has seen too much of France and

imperialism to relinquish an empire which, unless God give him grace to

learn a better wisdom than that which his father bequeathed, he cannot

fail to consider his by right. For the present he is harmless enough

personally; but if France continues in its unsettled state, and if the

son inherit any of the power and scheming of the race, he is as likely

as any other to be the coming man. We trust, however, that neither of

these conditions will be verified.

The death of the Emperor Napoleon undoubtedly lightened France. This

is not the time to examine his actions or his policy. He is now part,

and a very large part, of history; and history will paint him as it has

painted better and greater men--in light and shade.

The pilgrimages to the various French shrines were a feature of the

year, drawing the eyes of the world to France, and the blessing of

heaven on France. Millions of pilgrims of all classes, ages, and cast

of politics visited La Salette, Paray-le-Monial, Our Lady of Lourdes,

and a multitude of other shrines. The whole world looked on with

wonder. There was abundance of ridicule among a class of writers

from whose pens commendation would be an insult. One pilgrimage went

from Protestant England under the leadership of the Duke of Norfolk,

hereditary Earl Marshal of England. The leading secular newspapers,

as a rule, gave very fair and respectful accounts. If it were not

invidious to select from many, the letters of the correspondents of

the London _Times_ in England, and of the New York _Herald_ in this

country--particularly the latter--were admirable in tone, spirit,

and style. Pilgrimages were prohibited in Italy and Germany, on the

ground that they were political assemblages. They seem rather likely to

increase than to diminish in the coming year, and undoubtedly they have

imparted a fresh impetus to faith, and returned a solemn answer to the

"men of the time," the philosophers of the age, who find it so easy to

disbelieve in God.

1873 will be memorable in Spanish annals. The heart sickens and shrinks

from going over the dismal record. It is almost startling to read of

"the king" receiving deputations on New Year's, and that king Amadeus.

His abdication can scarcely have caused surprise to persons who had the

slightest inkling of the real state of affairs in Spain. THE CATHOLIC

WORLD, in its review of last year, although matters smiled on Amadeus

at the time, said: "We do not expect to find Amadeus' name at the

head of the Spanish government this day twelve-month." It said also,

"A good regent, not Montpensier, might bring about the restoration

of Don Alfonso; but where is such a regent? Don Carlos possesses the

greatest amount of genuine loyalty to his name and cause, and he would

be the winning man, could he only manage his rising in a more efficient

manner." How far those predictions have been verified by events our

readers may satisfy themselves. They required, indeed, no very keen

insight to make.

Previous to the abdication of Amadeus, the Carlist insurrection, under

the leadership of Prince Alfonso, the brother of Don Carlos, Saballs,

and a number of other chieftains of greater or less note, again broke

forth with renewed vigor. After his abdication, the government was all

at sea; and from that time to the present date there has been nothing

but a succession of changes of government, one as incapable as another,

until the country no longer presents the appearance of a nation. Don

Carlos appeared at the head of his forces early in the year. Frequent

reports of Carlist annihilation have kept the telegraph wires busily

employed ever since; yet, singular to relate, Don Carlos at present

is actual king in the north of Spain. The forces sent against him

have been defeated in every important engagement, and he only needs

artillery to advance into the heart of the country. How it will go with

him during the coming winter, which is rigorous in the north, remains

to be seen. Insurrections broke out in various parts of the country,

resulting, in some places, in scenes of horror and inhumanity, compared

with which the horrors of the Commune in Paris were humane. Men seemed

possessed by fiends, and the Spanish idea of a federal republic

took the form of every petty town its own absolute sovereign. There

was serious danger more than once of such insignificant governments

embroiling themselves with foreign powers. Part of the fleet revolted,

and is still in revolt. Part of the army endeavored to do so more than

once. They cannot but despise wild theorists of the Castelar type, who

would heal a bleeding nation with windy speeches. The future looks

dark for Spain; and its only hope now lies in Don Carlos gaining the

throne as speedily as he may. The country is overwhelmed with financial

dangers, and it will take a cycle of peace and sound government to

atone for the untold evils of these few years of excess. As matters

now stand, victory sits on the helm of Don Carlos, and the coming year

will probably find him King of Spain. We hope and believe that he will

prove himself worthy of the vast sacrifices which have been made in his

favor, and show as a wise, temperate, and truly Catholic sovereign over

a noble race run mad with riot. As for a Spanish republic, Alcoy and

Cartagena indicate what that means.

In this connection it would seem that we should take some notice of

the case of the _Virginius_; but, at the time of sending this to press

(Nov. 29), the question is too incomplete and unsettled to enable us

to announce the final solution, which will have become a fact when

these lines are read. To pronounce our own judgment on the merits of

the case, in the brief and superficial manner to which our limits

would restrict us, we are unwilling. We merely say one thing, which

is obvious on the face of things, that there was no sufficient reason

to justify the hurried and summary massacre of the prisoners captured

on the _Virginius_. Filibustering we detest as a crime. Nevertheless,

Cuba has been frightfully misgoverned. The reconciliation of Cuba to

Spanish rule is impossible. If it can be rightfully made a free state,

or annexed to the United States, we think it will be a benefit to the

Cubans to be set free from Spanish rule.

The great feature of the English year has been the educational

question--a question that at present is agitating the world, and is

debated alike throughout all Europe, in our own country, in the states

of South America, in India even, and in Australia. It is summed up in

this: Shall education be Christian or not? If Christian, it tends to

make the coming race bad citizens, inasmuch as it teaches children that

there is a God, whose laws even governments must obey. There are side

issues, but that constitutes the main point, however governments may

seek to disguise the fact. If unchristian, the children learn that they

are only graduating to become capable citizens of the state, and that

that is their highest duty. This is paganism, and to this doctrine of

education Christians cannot consent.

Mr. Gladstone, finding his party shaking, once more strove to

consolidate and make it a unit on an Irish question. He took up

the Irish educational grievance--and undoubtedly a sore grievance

it is--and tried to construct a university which should be equally

acceptable to all creeds and no creeds. As might have been expected,

it proved acceptable to none. Mr. Gladstone's model university was to

exclude chairs of theology, philosophy, and history. The very proposal

is sufficient to show how impossible it was for Catholics to support

such a measure. The Irish vote very rightly turned the scale against

him, and Mr. Disraeli was credited with a victory. After a threatened

dissolution, the Gladstone government resumed, and the conservative

gains have gone on steadily increasing, so that it is not at all

improbable that Mr. Disraeli will find himself and the conservative

party in power after the next general elections.

The British government paid to the United States the amount of the

Geneva award--£3,500,000.

A war is being waged against the Ashantees, successfully so far. The

Australian colonies are advancing in wealth and independence. From

Bengal, at the close of the year, comes a dread rumor of famine that

seems to be only too well founded. There was an increase in the price

of coal, resulting, apparently, from a report of its scarcity.

In the early part of the year, a strike of the miners and iron-workers

of South Wales, by which 60,000 men were thrown out of employment,

extended over two months. It was finally settled by mutual concessions

on the part of masters and men. It evinced the growing power of

trades-unions; but, at the same time, a few figures, furnished by the

correspondent of the London _Times_, give sad evidence of what a losing

game strikes really are when they can possibly be avoided.

The correspondent writes from Merthyr, February 9, while the strike

was still in progress: "A few figures, showing the cost of the present

struggle, are instructive. To-day the strikers enter upon the seventh

week of its duration. Not a stroke of work has been done by over 60,000

persons since the 28th December last. In giving that figure, the number

is under-estimated rather than exaggerated. The average weekly earnings

of this industrial host was £60,000, while at the monthly pays or

settlements it would not be going beyond the truth to say the payment

exceeded the ordinary weekly draws by from 50 to 60 per cent. In the

six weeks of idleness, therefore, the workmen have lost, in round

figures, £400,000. The withdrawal of this vast sum from the circulation

of the district has created such a dearth of money as no tradesman has

ever experienced before. The strike payment of the Miners' Union has

amounted at the utmost to only £15,000--a miserable pittance compared

with the sum which would have been distributed through the various

channels of trade had the works continued in operation." The past

almost unprecedentedly dull business year in New York was owing, in

great measure, to the strikes in the busiest season of 1872.

In Ireland, and among the Irish in England and Scotland, the agitation

for home rule has spread with a vigor that promises success. Recently

the Irish prelates have given in their adherence to the programme,

and thus sanctioned the movement by the voice of the church. A cable

message informs us that Mr. Disraeli has seized upon this fact to warn

the world generally, and Mr. Disraeli's proverbially slow-witted party

particularly, that the contest between the Catholic Church and the

world is rapidly coming to a head, and will probably soon be fought

out by ordeal of battle. Mr. Disraeli inherits a keen scent for what

is likely to take in the market, whether of politics or a more vulgar

kind of commodity. He is at a loss for a party-cry, and has happily

seized upon one that of all others is likely to commend itself to the

British bucolic intellect. In the meantime, the Irish at home may

remember that in all their struggles, while they very wisely look to

themselves to right themselves, they may count on fast friends, chiefly

of their own race, scattered through every English-speaking people,

whose voices, at least, will be lifted up in their favor. Let them

continue to show such clean calendars as in the past year's assizes--in

itself a very strong proof for the right, since it involves the power

of self-government--and self-government cannot tarry much longer. The

solemn consecration of the whole country to the Sacred Heart, and of

Armagh Cathedral, are two events that will live in Irish history. The

general wonder evoked by the revolt of an Irish priest against his

bishop furnished a striking testimony to the unity of the church.

Russia has advanced a step farther into Asia and closer upon the

British possessions. Khiva was captured, after a show of resistance

by the forces of the khan. The collision between these two powers in

the East is not far distant. Russia has not yet forgotten Sebastopol;

and England showed a restive spirit at the advance of its great rival

into the East that at one time threatened to burst forth into open

opposition to the expedition. The contest is only delayed for a time.

Russia internally is not as calm as it might be. We hear from time

to time of the eruptions of strange secret societies. Undoubtedly

socialism is at work; and in these days, not despotism, but rational

freedom, is the only bulwark against its advance. The year opened with

the illness of the czarowitz. He recovered sufficiently to absent

himself from St. Petersburg just before the kaiser entered to greet

the czar. The love of the czarowitz for the Prussians is too well known

not to give a significance to his hurried departure on the arrival of

their emperor in his father's capital.

Austria opened a universal exposition at Vienna with a financial panic.

The country has under consideration the legislation of the period--a

bill for the regulation of the affairs of church and state. Austria

is not too strong as it stands; it will gain little if it join in the

universal attack upon the church of Christ and his Vicar.

Switzerland has essayed the _rôle_ of Bismarck admirably. It has turned

everybody in and everybody out, and church and chapel topsy-turvy, in

right royal fashion. All the ecclesiastical laws of Prussia have been

introduced there, with the addition that the _curés_ were elective. Of

course, Catholics could not vote for the election of their _curés_;

consequently, they did not appear at the polls in this matter. But

there are Catholics enough in Switzerland, and Italy also, to make

themselves felt at the polls in other matters, and it seems that the

chief remedy for their evils rests in their own hands. In Germany, as

was seen, the Catholics have gained a decisive increase on their vote

of last year, however small; and, to judge of the future by the past,

those German delegates will fight the battle of God and freedom nobly.

In England Catholics are active at the polls, and, small a minority as

they are, their vote tells.

Turning now to the East, every year seems to bring it nearer to the

West, and possibly to the fulfilment of the promise that F. Thebaud

brings out so strongly in his powerful work on _The Irish Race_--to

the time when the sons of Japheth shall "take possession of the tents

of Sem." During the past year, the Emperor of China made a concession

unprecedented in Chinese history, and doubtless many an old political

head shakes over the headlong rate at which the Chinese constitution is

being driven to destruction. The Brother of the Sun--we believe that is

the relationship--has allowed foreign potentates to present themselves

at court after the fashion of the outer barbarians. This, however, is

really an important concession, inasmuch as when the representatives

of civilized governments have access directly to the person of the

emperor, European and American subjects resident in China stand a

better chance of having the many annoyances and grievances put in their

way redressed; and the moral effect of the imperial concession on the

narrow-minded Chinese nation cannot fail to be of benefit.

Japan seems earnest in its endeavor to become Europeanized as rapidly

as possible. But it was as near, or nearer, centuries ago, when S.

Francis Xavier confuted the Bonzes. The narrowness and selfishness of

European traders alone prevented the nation from becoming Christian,

probably, at that time. Much depends, therefore, on the representatives

of foreign governments. If they are wise and large-hearted Christian

men, they may prove apostles to this nation, which seems to possess so

many admirable elements; but if, as so often seems the case, they are

only second-hand agents of Bible societies and narrow-minded bigots,

we may as well resign all hope of Japan. Some outrage is sure to recur

sooner or later with lamentable results. Certainly, as a rule, our own

foreign diplomats are not a class of men who reflect too much credit

on the American nation. They appear to have been chosen blindly or at

hap-hazard, in return for some electioneering service. Such is not

the spirit that should move the government of a nation like ours,

or any nation, to select representative men. They should be truly

representative men of this great people, large and liberal-minded, with

no bias whatever, but an eye single as that of justice.

Persia has also opened her gates and let forth her king to see the

world. What impression the "civilized" world made on Nasr-ed-Deen[180]

would be something worth knowing. He traversed Europe. He went to

Russia, and the czar showed him armies; he visited Berlin, and the

kaiser showed him other armies; he went to Austria--armies again;

England--armies, a navy this time, and a lord mayor; France--more

armies; Italy--armies still; and the king of kings went back again to

Persia to open his kingdom to civilized governments. Belgium showed him

the inside of a Christian temple for the first time, as he assured the

Papal Nuncio, when expressing his regret at not being able to visit

the Sovereign Pontiff. Can we wonder that the shah was soon weary of

his journey? Civilization could show him no grander sight than millions

of men drawn up in battle array and all the paraphernalia of war. It

exhausted itself in that--armies and nothing more. Yes, there was

something more--ballets.

The shah seems to have pawned his kingdom for a period of twenty years

to Baron Reuter, who is to do what he pleases with it in the interim

in the construction of railways, canals, and other means of internal

development, he paying the monarch £20,000 annually and a tithe of

the income resulting from the improvements. It seems a hazardous

undertaking in such a country; but the man who undertook it doubtless

"counted the costs" beforehand.

The mission of Sir Bartle Frere from the British government to

the interior of Africa, with a view to the putting a stop to the

barbarities of the slave-trade, promises, in connection with the

expedition under Sir Samuel Baker, to open up a road to European

intercourse with the natives of the interior. Some German scientists

in Berlin also set on foot during the past year an association for the

promotion of the exploration of Africa.

In the states of South America the same strife that we have witnessed

in Europe is being waged, which, under the name of church and state,

really means the absolutism of the state. The members of the Society

of Jesus and of other societies and orders have been expelled from

Mexico and several other states. Mexico has decreed civil marriage,

as has also Brazil, whose Masonic premier and cabinet are entering on

a persecution of the bishops for excommunicating members of secret

societies. During the year, the city of San Salvador was utterly

destroyed by an earthquake. The political order in these South American

states corresponds very closely with their natural order. They exist in

a chronic state of revolution and eruption.

In the natural order there have been furious storms, fraught with

disaster to life and property; although lives lost in this manner

have been insignificant in number compared with loss resulting from

wrecks owing mainly to neglect, as in the case of the _Northfleet_

and the _Atlantic_, and several railroad disasters on a large scale.

Boston was again visited by fire, but escaped with a loss less severe

than before. The flooding of the Po once more brought disaster upon

Italy, as did our own annual freshets upon us in the spring. With the

exception of the threatened famine in Bengal, the seasons have been

propitious, and the want which threatens the United States particularly

during the coming year is due mainly to financial panics and strikes.

Within the past year, Berlin, Vienna, and New York have known panics,

all seemingly resulting from the same immediate cause--the failure

of one or two great houses; while the markets of the world have been

threatened in consequence. Failures of one or two great houses could

not possibly affect in so terrible a manner all kinds of business were

it not that there was something radically wrong at the bottom--an

evil leaven that has spread to the whole commercial mass. It would

probably be a puzzle, even to a financier, to lay before the world

the secrets of these periodical panics, resulting in ruin to so many

outside of the comparative few immediately concerned. It looks as

though, in this money-getting age, and among our own money-getting

people particularly--on which subject the Holy Father this year

addressed to us a special warning--the mass of men were animated by

the principle, "Get money at all costs; never mind the means." Even

the greatest houses live on a system of puff. In private life the man

who lives beyond his means must sooner or later come to grief, and

face ruin or roguery. In business the same rule must hold good. Vast

establishments are conducted on a system vitally unsound. Probably

there exists scarcely a house to-day that, if called on at any one

moment to pay all its outstanding debts, could do so. But when the

majority of houses are conducted on principles that on a limited

capital base a business involving an outlay of perhaps twenty times its

amount, we must be prepared for these periodical disasters. The evil is

that this essentially dishonest system has become the only recognized

style of conducting business in these days; so that commerce has come

to be a game of speculation, where the cleverest and most daring rogue

generally wins--a game fostered by the excessive issue of paper money.

Among events that attracted some attention during the year was the

still lingering trial of the Tichborne claimant, which was not thrown

into the shade by the trial of Marshal Bazaine. There have been

meetings of the internationalists and other societies. New York was

entertained or bored, as may be, for a week, by a meeting of Protestant

gentlemen, mostly clericals, of all shades of belief, who called

themselves an Evangelical Alliance. They were not quite agreed as to

the particular object of their meeting, from which nothing resulted.

Several Catholic nations and numerous dioceses have been solemnly

dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ during the past

year, the province of New York among the number, on the feast of the

Immaculate Conception, December 8. Dr. Corrigan was consecrated Bishop

of Newark, and F. Gross of Savannah.

The last point has come: the mention of the dead. The Emperor Napoleon

was the first of note to go; his empire went with him, for from first

to last it was essentially a personal government. As his will, drawn

up in his still palmy days, said, "Power is a heavy burden." He forced

himself upon a nation of 30,000,000 of human souls; he voluntarily

assumed the responsibility of the absolute guidance of that mighty

multitude. He never had a fixed principle to guide him. He never dared

honestly say, "This is right," "This is wrong." The power which he

voluntarily assumed and kept to himself so long--one solitary man the

ruler of 30,000,000--ended in disaster for that mighty multitude and

himself.

This death dwarfs all the others. Nevertheless, many a man was laid

in his grave last year whose name will live after him. The church

has lost Mgr. Losanna, Bishop of Biela, the oldest Italian bishop;

F. de Smet, the apostolic missionary among the Indians; and here, in

New York, Vicar-General Starrs. Literature has suffered in Manzoni,

whose death the Italians rightly viewed as a national calamity. Edward

Bulwer, Lord Lytton, a man of many and great gifts, has at last gone

to tell "what could he do with them." History will not soon find again

an Amedée Thierry. Col. James F. Meline, a frequent and very able

contributor to THE CATHOLIC WORLD, is a loss to American Catholic

literature. The Anglican Bishop of Winchester, a gifted orator, but

a churchman of no very fixed opinions, was killed by a fall from his

horse. On the same day died Lord Westbury, a man of a singularly acute

and powerful intellect, who has left his mark on English legislation.

Our Chief-Justice Chase is gone, and it will be difficult to find his

equal. Rattazzi, the Italian minister, is gone to his place. John

Stuart Mill, who could not well be dismissed in a sentence, is dead. He

was a singular mixture of philosophical acumen and practical stupidity.

Art has lost Landseer; science, Maury and Liebig, the chemist; while

medicine laments Nelaton. The American, French, and English stage

mourns respectively Forrest and Macready, the once rival tragedians,

and Lafont, a prince of comedians. Royalty has lost the Empress Dowager

of Austria, a very holy woman; the Empress Dowager of Brazil; the King

of Saxony, a scholar and a Christian, and the Duke of Brunswick, who

was famed for anything but holiness. General Paez, who once was famous,

is dead. The death of Captain Hall adds another to the list of brave,

adventurous spirits who so far have wasted their lives in the endeavor

to discover the North Pole. His death involved the failure of the

_Polaris_ expedition, which was fitted out by the American government.

The story of the rescue of the _Polaris_ crew belongs to the romance of

history.

Bernstorff and Olozaga, the ambassadors respectively of Germany and

Spain, have dropped from diplomatic circles into that circle where the

finest diplomacy cannot cover the slightest delinquency.

There is little to add. Another year has happily passed over our

heads without a serious war, but the future threatens to make ample

and speedy atonement for this lamentable deficiency. Last year THE

CATHOLIC WORLD closed its review by saying that "Europe was arming."

This year it may say Europe is armed. Prussia, Russia, France, Austria,

Italy--what are they? Nations of warriors. Had the Persian king asked

the meaning of these armed nations, he would probably have been

answered, with a grim jocularity, that civilized powers found such

the only method of keeping the peace and preserving that imaginary

thing--equilibrium. The Russian expedition into and capture of Khiva,

the defeat of the Dutch by the Atchinese in the Island of Sumatra, the

English war with Ashantee, make the three ruptures of international

peace during the year. England seems particularly choice in her

selection of foes: Abyssinia, the Looshai tribes, and now--Ashantee.

She is jealous of her turbulent neighbors, and must vindicate her

ancient prestige.

The main events which have moved the world during the past year have

now been touched upon hastily and crudely enough, but sufficiently, it

may be hoped, to give the reader some idea of the mainsprings which

move this busy world, of which we form a part, and in which each one

is set to play a part and render an account of it. What was said at

the beginning may be more readily appreciated now, or denied--that the

year of our Lord 1873 is bigger with portent than event, and a portent

that bodes ill, as far as human eye can see, for the church of Christ,

built upon Peter. Mr. Disraeli's party-cry may contain more truth than

the crier, wise man though he be, dreamed: there is such an intense,

bitter, determined, and general hostility, on the part of "the kings

and the princes of the world, against the Lord and against his Christ";

the opposition is fast becoming so intolerant and absolutely unbearable

to Catholics; while protest and opposition in words alone seem vain and

idle when addressed to ears that are deaf.

In the meanwhile, Catholics must not budge an inch. They are not only

fighting for their religion, but for human freedom. To yield the

smallest point of principle is to be false to their conscience. The

more persistent is the non-Catholic world in false theories of human

rights and human wrongs, the more persistent must they be in adhering,

at any sacrifice, to what they know to be right, and what was right

when modern nations were unborn. Catholics must remember that all are

fighting the same battle, and all are bound to take a hand in the

struggle. What the Pope fights for, that all Catholics fight for--from

the bishop to the priest, from the priest to the one whose voice is

heard in the halls of legislation, to the editor in his office, to the

merchant in his counting-house, to the very beggar in the street. There

is no difference, no line to be drawn. We must be one, and, if right

must win, then victory is ours.

For, for what do we contend? To be Christian; to be free to obey the

church which our Lord Jesus Christ founded. Allegiance to a foreign

power? What folly! Allegiance to Pius IX. is allegiance to Jesus

Christ. Nothing more, nothing less. Are Catholics not Americans, or

Germans, or Irishmen, or Englishmen, for being Catholics? How, when,

where, was it ever shown that they were not? Why, when Protestantism

was not known, were Catholics not nationalists--when Christendom was

one?

A new year is opening before us--a year of trial, not so much in

this country, but to the universal church. Where freedom is left to

Catholics, as in this country, they must never cease, by prayer, by

the pen, by the voice, by every means that the occasion calls forth,

to help their persecuted brethren; not looking to this government or

to that to help them, but basing their cause on their natural rights.

There is not a civil, religious, or political right anywhere existing

on this earth, belonging to non-Catholics, which does not also belong

to Catholics. They must get that idea fast in their minds, and fight

on that which is a lawful and just issue. No Protestant can claim a

right which does not belong equally to a Catholic. No Protestant, be he

individual or government, can say to a Catholic: You must not believe

this doctrine or that; you must not take the Pope for an infallible

guide in religion, but yourself; you must not educate your children in

your religion, and so on. This is the language, open or secret, of the

day which is addressed to Catholics. It must be met with no hesitation,

but with the response: Our freedom is your freedom; our rights are your

rights; our interest is your interest; nay, after all, our God is your

God. Let us fight our battles of opinion civilly. But when you issue

paper constitutions every day, and tell us that we must obey such and

such an iniquitous law--a law revolting to our conscience, our reason,

and every aspiration of freedom--we throw your paper constitution to

the winds, and refuse to obey it. _It is necessary to obey God rather

than man!_ We conclude by wishing to all our readers a happy New Year,

to our Holy Father a speedy triumph, and to ourselves the pleasure of

recording, at the end of 1874, the history of the confusion and rout of

the enemies of the church.

Of events accidentally omitted in the preceding record of the year,

were the ravages of the yellow fever in the South, particularly at

Memphis and Shreveport, where many Catholic priests and religious

sacrificed their lives in the service of the sick. To the list of

disasters at sea resulting from carelessness must be added the recent

wreck of the _Ville du Havre_, with a loss of upwards of 200 lives. The

festival of the Catholic Union at Boston also deserved mention, as it

evoked a demonstration of Catholic strength and Catholic feeling that

was an honest source of pride. Among names omitted in the death-roll

were those of Dr. H. S. Hewit, a noble man who sacrificed much for his

country and his faith; Hiram Powers, the sculptor; Laura Keene, the

actress, an estimable woman and a good Catholic; Sir Henry Holland,

Henry W. Wilberforce, brother of the Anglican bishop, and for a long

time editor of the London _Weekly Register_ (Catholic); General Hardee,

and a name once very famous, Abdel-Kader. A new Atlantic cable was this

year laid by the _Great Eastern_ between Valentia and Heart's Content,

N. F.

FOOTNOTES:

[176] "Church and State in Germany," _Catholic World_, July, 1872.

[177] See the response of the German Emperor to the Pope, in the

correspondence recently published.

[178] The New York _Tablet_, July 19, 1873--"A Truly Liberal

Government."

[179] The London _Times_, January, 1873.

[180] Possibly the spelling of the name is incorrect; but there is such

a variety to choose from that the correct form is a nice question.

NEW PUBLICATIONS.

THE ARK OF THE PEOPLE. By Plato Punchinello. Translated from the

French by a Friend of Christian Civilization. Philadelphia: P. F.

Cunningham. 1873.

A very timely book, whose publication is very welcome. It is one of a

class very numerous at present in France, which we hope to see becoming

common in our own country. That is to say, it treats of the horrible

consequences in the social order flowing from the prevalent infidel,

heretical, anti-Catholic theories, maxims, errors, and illusions of the

age, vamped up by sophists and charlatans, and palmed off upon their

dupes and victims as philosophy, science, advanced ideas, principles of

progress and improvement in civilization. It treats also of Catholic

principles as the principles of true social and political order and

well-being. It is lively and brilliant, and we recommend it most

earnestly as a book most useful and entertaining, specially fitted

to counteract the false notions which are but too current even among

Catholics.

LASCINE. By an Oxford Man. New York: Appletons. 1873.

SEVEN STORIES. By Lady Georgiana Fullerton. London: Burns & Oates.

1873. (New York: Sold by The Catholic Publication Society.)

MARIE AND PAUL. By "Our Little Woman." Same publishers.

THE BARON OF HERTZ. A Tale of the Anabaptists. From the French of

Albert De Labadye. New York: O'Shea. 1873.

GORDON LODGE. By Miss M. Agnes White. Baltimore: Kelly & Piet. 1873.

Here is quite a supply of works of fiction by Catholic writers to

help while away the dreary winter months. _Lascine_ is a story whose

incidents are taken from the experience of an Oxford convert. A

number of very good stories of this kind have appeared since the

great movement began; and the movement itself, besides its serious

importance, is certainly very fertile in romantic incidents, and

furnishes abundant stuff for a skilful novelist. _Lascine_ is a book

which can be read with great interest, and is by no means lacking in

cleverness. Its principal fault is an excess of sentimentality. We

think it promises a great deal for the future success of its young

author.

Anything written by Lady Georgiana Fullerton must of course be

excellent. The first and last of these stories are particularly good,

and the last one ought to be read by all our young people, especially

young ladies who aspire to become literary stars.

_Marie and Paul_ is a very pretty and pathetic tale.

_The Baron of Hertz_ has a great deal of historical instruction about

the crimes and horrors of the German Reformation, couched in the form

of a stirring and most tragic story.

Miss White's _début_ is very creditable to her. She has originality of

conception and power of delineation and description. There are certain

inaccuracies in respect to the English titles of nobility, and some

other minor faults of style which indicate the need of a more careful

attention to details and a more accurate revision. As a whole, the

story is a very successful effort.

THE REAL PRESENCE. By Rev. P. Tissot, S.J. New York: P. O'Shea.

1873.

An excellent little book, solid, simple, and pious, good alike for

old and young. The doctrinal gravity of the treatise is relieved in

an agreeable and edifying manner by some interesting narrations of

miraculous events relating to the Blessed Eucharist. F. Tissot has

chosen these incidents with great judgment, selecting those which are

both extremely wonderful and at the same time very well authenticated,

and taking care to give the proof as well as the history. There

cannot be anything more stupid or more provoking than the ignorant,

supercilious, and flippant manner in which the writers for the secular

and _soi-disant_ religious press, sneer at these Catholic miracles,

without pretending to reason about the evidence on which the truth

rests. There are some who think it the best policy to keep silent about

them; but it is our opinion that we ought to bring them constantly

before the face and eyes of the unbelieving world, although the light

which flashes from them may be disagreeable to many who do not wish to

be disturbed in their fatal slumber.

SAXE HOLM'S STORIES. New York: Scribner. 1874.

A most peculiar school of fiction, which we may call the

"transcendental," has grown up among the New Englanders and their

_semblables_ within our own remembrance. Some of its productions are of

fine quality, and it oscillates in morality between the two extremes of

Catholicity and pantheism. Nevertheless, as a dear friend, who lived

and died a Unitarian minister, once remarked to us, the prevailing

tendency of this entire transcendental movement is a very circuitous

return to the religion of our Catholic forefathers. The stories of this

volume, written, we conjecture, by a lady, are a sample of the kind of

literature referred to. The first story, "Draxy Miller," is a _chef

d'œuvre_. It may seem odd that we should perceive a Catholic undertone

in a story the heroine of which, after marrying a minister in a wild

country hamlet of New Hampshire, takes charge of the preaching for a

year after her husband's death. Female preaching, and the whole set

of strong-minded female notions, we abominate, of course. But Draxy

Miller's last epoch of life, as the passing _umbra_ of her husband,

is so described that the repulsive aspect of the pastoral office in

petticoats is hidden. And as an ideal character Draxy is exquisite.

"Reuben Miller's Daughter" wins the heart of the reader, as she did the

hearts of the old captain, the stage-driver, the elder, and the elder's

parishioners.

"The One-Legged Dancers" is capital also, and the other stories are

written with skill and effect. There is rather too strong an infusion

of transcendental notions about love, yet the moral tone is much higher

than is usually found in novels, and the author appears to recognize

the stringent obligation of wedlock. We rank this volume of stories

decidedly in the first class.

In the advertisements at the end of the volume we perceive the

announcement of a translation of Jules Verne's _De la Terre à la Lune_,

together with another similar book, describing a journey to the centre

of the earth. The first of these extraordinary _jeux d'esprit_ has

given us so much pleasure in the original, overflowing, as it is, with

humor, poetry, and scientific knowledge, that we call the attention of

our readers, in a spirit of purely disinterested philanthropy, to the

fact that they can get this book and its fellow in English. They will

help very materially the effort to pass a merry Christmas.

THE ARENA AND THE THRONE. By L. T. Townsend, D.D., author of

_Credo_, etc. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1873.

The principal object of this book is one in which we heartily

sympathize, being the refutation of the ordinary shallow arguments

which some persons consider as conclusive in favor of what is known as

the "plurality of worlds" and the maintenance of the dignity of man

as a worthy possessor of the universe of God. The material universe

is insignificant compared with a single soul. We need not take so

much pains to try to utilize it. The convenience of one man would be a

sufficient reason for its existence. The physical arguments, drawn from

actual observation, in favor of the uninhabitability of the worlds with

which we have become in any degree acquainted, are well put.

RHODA THORNTON'S GIRLHOOD. By Mary E. Pratt. Boston: Lee & Shepard.

1873.

A pretty, simple story of New England life; a good book for a school

prize. The usual hearty country pleasures--husking and quilting

parties, Thanksgiving, etc., are well and truly described; a healthy

tone runs through the story, which is a natural and probable one. The

little heroine, Rhoda, a thoughtful, womanly child, begins her life in

an alms-house, and then spends a few years on an old-fashioned farm.

She turns out to be the great-granddaughter of a lost member of an old

family, whose heirs and representatives she and her brother become.

The incidents are not violently improbable, and the disintegration

naturally arising in such a family through imprudent marriages and

removals to distant and unreclaimed territories very adequately

accounts for the mystery. The style is free and simple; studied

ornament or any silly rhetorical flourish is avoided.

RITUALE ROMANUM PAULI V. PONTIFICIS MAXIMI JUSSU EDITUM ET A

BENEDICTO XIV. AUCTUM ET CASTIGATUM: CUI NOVISSIMA ACCEDIT

BENEDICTIONUM ET INSTRUCTIONUM APPENDIX. Baltimori: Excudebat

Joannes Murphy. 1873. 12mo, pp. 546.

This is the first entire edition of the _Rituale_ published in this

country, and we take pleasure in commending it as one very creditable

to the publisher. The type is large, the paper white and clear, and

very excellent register is observed in printing the rubrics. If there

is any suggestion we would offer, it is that the next edition be

printed on thinner paper, so that the volume may be reduced to a more

portable size without any diminution in legibility. The _imprimatur_ of

the archbishop of Baltimore obviates any necessity for comment on the

text.

THE ACTS OF THE EARLY MARTYRS. By J. A. M. Fastré, S.J. Third

series. Philadelphia: P. Cunningham & Son. 1873.

The first and second series of this valuable and suggestive work have

received due notice in these pages at the time of their publication. We

have before us now the third series, chiefly treating of the martyrs

of the IVth century, under the tenth general persecution--that of

Diocletian. The contents are most interesting, the more so as some of

the saints here mentioned are less known than those whose acts filled

the first two volumes. The great and foremost reason why we rejoice

to see the sufferings and constancy of the early martyrs brought

before the remembrance of our people is that these sufferings have

some analogy with the present condition of the church in many lands.

Although the physical tortures of early days are out of fashion, the

moral persecution is not less ingeniously spread over the whole life

of a Catholic than it was in former times. The same kind of constancy

is required to conquer the latter as was needed by the martyrs to

overcome bodily pain. In those early times social ostracism, exile from

honorable professions, and confiscation of property, were as frequently

as now the guerdon of him who embraced the unpopular religion, as we

see in the case of S. Tarachus and his companions. In every instance

the bribe held out by Satan to the confessors of the faith was the

favor of the emperor, the honors and emoluments of the magistracy,

great riches, and high position, as we see specially in the case of S.

Clement of Ancyra. His is the most wonderful life recounted in this

little book. Eighteen years of incessant martyrdom; the most heroic

constancy and patience; the most singular and miraculous Providence

watching over him; the powers of persuasion which converted his

jailers, his executioners, and thousands of pagans in the various

places where he was tortured and confined; the manner in which it

pleased God to make him whole no less than six times after the devil

had done his best to render his body unrecognizable--all contribute to

make of his life a tissue of a more wonderful and awful romance than

any imaginary tale of mediæval marvel. To S. Blasius of Sebaste we

would also call attention, as having forestalled S. Francis of Assisi

in his god-given power over the lower creation. In the story of S.

Polyeuctus the reader will recognize the foundation of Corneille's

sublime Christian drama of _Polyeucte_, written at the instance of

Mme. de Maintenon. The style of this book is flowing and correct;

simple, as befits the subject, which cannot be raised higher by any

flight of human fancy or adornment of human fashion; is accessible to

the understanding of the unlearned, and cannot fail involuntarily to

touch the hearts of all. Is it not a strange thought to dwell upon,

that, among all the conversions wrought on the spot by the supernatural

courage of the martyrs, there should be hardly one instance on record

of it having converted their judge? The sudden judgment executed on

some governors and prætors is indeed mentioned in a few cases. Are we

to suppose that they were really beyond persuasion, being possessed by

a devil who had complete control over their faculties? It is a very

awful thing whereon to meditate, but these stories of our forerunners

in the good fight certainly strongly suggest the idea.

* * * * *

ANNOUNCEMENT.--We shall begin in our next number the publication of a

new story by Mrs. Craven, author of _A Sister's Story_, _Fleurange_,

etc. The work will be issued simultaneously with its appearance in _Le

Correspondant_, the translation being made from the original MS. with

the special sanction of the author from whom the exclusive right of

publication in this country has been purchased.

The continuation of _Grapes and Thorns_, which has been delayed by the

departure of the author on an European tour, will be resumed in the

February number.

THE

CATHOLIC WORLD.

VOL. XVIII., No. 107.--FEBRUARY, 1874.[181]

THE PRINCIPLES OF REAL BEING.

II.

EXTRINSIC PRINCIPLES OF BEING.

As in chemistry, so also in metaphysics, the labor and difficulty

attending the analysis of complex things is proportional to the degree

of their complexity. Hence in the search after the principles of real

being, which we are about to make, we judge it expedient, for the

greater convenience and satisfaction of our philosophical readers, to

start from the principles of the most simple among the subjects of

metaphysical analysis--that is, from the principles of primitive beings.

By "primitive" being we mean a being not made up of other beings, but

"strictly one in its entity"--_unum per se in ratione entis_--and

therefore having nothing of which it can be deprived without ceasing to

be altogether.

It is to be observed that a primitive being may be conceived to exist

either contingently or through the necessity of its own nature. Of

course, a being which exists through the necessity of its own nature is

perfectly independent of all extrinsic things, as it contains in its

own nature the adequate reason of its being, and therefore admits of no

extrinsic principles of any kind. But a being which exists contingently

is a being which has not within itself the adequate reason of its

existence; whence it follows that its existence cannot be accounted

for but by recourse to some extrinsic principle or principles. As the

knowledge of extrinsic principles is calculated to throw much light

also on the intrinsic constitution of primitive contingent beings, let

us make such principles the subject of our first investigation.

We affirm that the extrinsic principles of every primitive contingent

being are three; for to the question, "Whence any such being proceeds,"

three different answers can be given, and three only.

First, we can assign the reason why, or the end _for the sake of

which_, a being has been made to exist.

Secondly, we can point out the agency _through which_ a being has been

made to exist.

Thirdly, and lastly, we can mention the term _out of which_ a being has

been brought into existence.

These three principles virtually contain the whole theory of creation.

If we were now writing for unbelievers, we would be obliged to commence

by establishing some preliminary truths, such as God's existence,

the contingency of the world, and the philosophical impossibility of

accounting for its origin without recourse to the dogma of creation.

But as our habitual readers are presumed to be sufficiently instructed

about these fundamental truths, we think we may here dispense with a

direct demonstration of the same, and avoid a digression which would

lead us too far from the subject now under examination. As, however,

this article may possibly fall into the hands of some dupe of modern

infidelity, we propose to make a few incidental remarks on their usual

objections, and to lay down, before we conclude, some of the arguments

by which unbelievers can be convinced of the absolute truth of what we

now assume as the ground of our explanations.

We assume, then, that there is a Creator, a God, a being infinitely

intelligent and infinitely powerful, eternal, and independent. Such a

being, as infinitely perfect, is infinitely happy, and experiences no

need whatever of anything outside of himself. He therefore does not

create anything, unless he freely wills; nor wills he anything, unless

it is for some good which he freely intends; for nothing but good

can be the object of volition. Now, the only good which God in his

infinite wisdom can freely intend is the exterior manifestation of his

divine perfections. It is, therefore, for this end that creatures were

brought into existence.

Our first answer to the question above proposed points out this _final

principle_ of creation--that is, the manifestation of God's perfections

in such a degree and manner as he himself was pleased freely to

determine. To attain this end, it is obvious that God was obliged to

bestow upon his creatures such a degree of reality as would enable

them to show in themselves and in their finite perfections a finite

image, and, so to say, a reflex of the perfections of their Creator.

Hence the final principle, on which the existence of contingent beings

originally depends, comprises not only the manifestation of God's

perfections in a determinate degree, but also, and more immediately,

the bestowal of a proportionate degree of entity upon creatures, that

they may carry on such a manifestation according to the design of their

Creator. Thus the _ultimate_ end of creation is indeed God's glory,

or the manifestation of his perfections; but the _proximate_ end of

creation, and that which is immediately obtained in the very act of

creation, is the existence of the created things with that degree of

reality and with those endowments which make them fit instruments for

the aforesaid manifestation. Accordingly, when asked whence a primitive

contingent being proceeds, our first answer must be that it proceeds

from God's design of showing his existence and infinite perfection by

communicating contingent existence and finite perfections outside of

himself.

Let us here take notice that "modern thought" ignores final principles

altogether, and pretends that arguments from design have no value in

science. In this pretension we unmistakably recognize the materialistic

propensities and the lack of philosophical reasoning by which our age

is afflicted. When our modern sages will prove that creation does not

proceed from a will, or that a will can act without an object, then

they will be entitled to the honor of a serious refutation. As it is,

their negative position is sufficiently refuted by a simple appeal to

common sense.

To those who, without denying final causes, maintain that we cannot

ascertain them, nor make them an object of science, we reply that,

although we do not know _all_ the particular ends which each creature

may be destined to fulfil, we nevertheless know perfectly well the

general end of creation. Now, nothing more is needed for establishing

the reality of the first extrinsic principle on which the existence of

every contingent being depends.

Our second answer points out the _efficient principle_ of

creation--that is, God's omnipotent power. Rationalists and

materialists have tried to do away with this most necessary principle.

Besides the old pagan assumption of self-existent matter, which many

of them adopted in order to supersede the necessity of a creator, they

have tried to popularize other inventions of more recent thinkers,

who for the God of the Bible have substituted what they style the

_Absolute_, and pretend that what we call "contingent beings" are mere

apparitions of the _Absolute_--that is, the _Absolute_ manifesting

itself. Without stopping here to refute such a strange theory, we shall

content ourselves with observing that what is altogether _absolute_ is

intrinsically _unmodifiable_--a truth which needs no demonstration, as

it immediately results from the comparison of the two terms; whence it

follows that, if the _Absolute_ wishes to manifest itself, it cannot do

so by assuming any new form, but only by means of something extraneous

to its own nature, and consequently through the instrumentality of

some being _produced_ by it, perfectly _distinct_ from it, and which

may admit of such modifications as we witness everywhere around us,

and as we know to be irreconcilable with the nature of the _Absolute_.

This suffices to show that no apparition or manifestation of the

_Absolute_ can be conceived without implying an exertion of efficient

power.[182] We say, then, in our second answer, that it is through

divine omnipotence that contingent beings were actually brought into

existence by such a communication of reality as was proportionate to

the design of their Creator. In other terms, God's omnipotent power is

the _efficient_ principle of all primitive contingent being.

Our third answer points out the _terminus ex quo_ of creation--that

is, the term out of which every contingent being is primarily educed.

Such a term is mere nothingness; for whatever primarily begins to

exist must come out of absolute non-existence. It is against this that

our modern pseudo-philosophers most loudly protest, as they stoutly

proclaim that "nothing comes out of nothing"--_ex nihilo nihil fit_.

We may well smile at their useless protestation; for the fact is that

nothing is ever brought into existence but from its contrary--that

is, from its non-existence. It would be vain to object that, to build

a house or a ship, materials are needed. Of course they are needed,

but a house is a compound, not a primitive, being; and to build a

house is not _to produce_ the house, but only to effect _the artistic

arrangement_ of its materials. Now, undoubtedly, before the house is

built, such an arrangement has no existence. The only thing, therefore,

that the builder efficiently produces springs out of non-existence.

We fully admit that a physical compound cannot be made up without

materials--viz., without pre-existent components--but, to be sure, the

first components do not themselves depend on other components, because

the first components are _primitive_ beings, and, as such, cannot

be made of any pre-existing material. Yet they must have been made,

since they exist and are contingent; and, if made of no pre-existing

material, certainly brought out of nothing.

But as our readers need none of our arguments to be convinced of a

truth of which they are already in possession, we will set aside all

further discussion on this subject, and conclude, from the preceding

remarks, that when we are asked whence a contingent being originally

comes, our last answer must be that it comes out of nothing as the

_term_ of its eduction. Nothingness, in this case, holds the place of

the _material_ principle, which is wanting.

It is clear, then, that all primitive contingent beings can, and

must, be traced to three extrinsic principles. This doctrine contains

nothing difficult, far-fetched, or mysterious, and its great simplicity

proves that metaphysics, after all, may be less frightfully abstruse

than some people are apt to believe. This same doctrine is also the

universal doctrine of all philosophers who did not lose themselves in

the dreams of visionary systems. It is true that they do not always

mention, as formally as we do, the final object of creation as a

distinct principle; but they do not deny it. In treating of the origin

of things, they usually consider the final and the efficient principle

of creation as a single adequate principle, on the ground that finality

and efficiency, viewed absolutely as they are in God, are but one and

the same thing. They also omit very frequently the mention of the term

out of which things are educed, not because they do not acknowledge it,

but because they know that it has no positive causality. Nevertheless,

a little reflection will show that such a course is not the best

calculated to give a distinct idea of the principiation of things; on

the contrary, the very nature of the metaphysical process demands that

each of the three extrinsic principles be kept in view very distinctly

and explicitly.

We admit, of course, that the final and the efficient principle

of creation, viewed absolutely as they are in God, are really and

entitatively the same thing; but we consider that the intention, or

volition of the end, has its connection with created beings, not on

account of its absolute entity, which is necessary, but on account

of its extrinsic termination, which is contingent; for, evidently,

no act can be conceived as the principle of a being, except inasmuch

as it is connected with the same being. Accordingly, God's volition

is the principle of things, not inasmuch as it is an absolute act,

entitatively necessary, but inasmuch as it is an act having a

contingent termination. On the other hand, God's infinite power must

indeed be conceived as connoting an infinity of beings that _can_

be created, but is not conceivable as connoting determinate beings

that _will_ be created, unless something be found that connects it

especially with the same determinate beings. Now, what is it that

connects God's omnipotence with any determinate being which is to be

created but his volition of a contingent determinate object--that

is, his volition as having a contingent termination? Omnipotence,

therefore, acquires a special connection with a determinate contingent

being only on account of the extrinsic termination of divine volition;

and thus divine omnipotence and divine volition have, under this

consideration, a kind of relative opposition, on account of which the

one that induces the special connection is to be distinguished from the

other that acquires it.

Moreover, in the investigation of first principles we must continue our

analysis as far as we can--that is, until we reach the ultimate terms

into which the subject of our investigation can be resolved. Now, it is

evident that omnipotence, as freely connected with the production of

a determinate being, is not the ultimate term of analysis; for we can

go further, and assign the reason of that free connection--viz., the

actual volition of an end. Hence the final and the efficient principle

of creation, though not really distinct in God, afford a real ground

for two distinct concepts, and are to be considered as two distinct

extrinsic principles with respect to all created things.

The third extrinsic principle--that is, the term out of which

contingent beings are originally educed--is very frequently overlooked

as irrelevant, because it has no reality. We are of opinion that it

should be kept in view by all means, and prominently too, for many

reasons which will be hereafter explained, and especially for the

easier refutation of pantheism. Such a term has, indeed, no reality;

but it is not necessary that all the extrinsic principles of being

should be realities. Common sense teaches, on the contrary, that when

a thing is to be first brought into existence, it is necessary that it

should pass from its non-being into being; whence it is manifest that

_its non-being_ is the proper term out of which it has to be educed.

Now, the non-being of a thing is its nothingness; and, therefore, its

nothingness is the proper term out of which it must be educed. For

the same reason, the schoolmen uniformly taught with Aristotle that

_privation_ also was to be ranked among the principles of things,

although privations are not positive beings;[183] and therefore the

nothingness of the term from which creatures are educed is no objection

to its being placed among the extrinsic principles of contingent beings.

As, however, that which is looked upon as a principle is always

conceived to connote the thing principiated, and, on the other hand,

_absolute_ nothingness has no such connotation (for connotation is

virtual relativity, and cannot spring from nothing), it follows that

_nothingness_, when conceived as a term out of which a being is educed,

is to be looked upon, not as an absolute negation of being, but as _a

negation out of which divine omnipotence, by the production of an act,

brings the creature into being_. In other terms, nothingness is to be

considered, under God's hand, as _a negative potency of something

real_, which can be actuated; and, with regard to any individual

reality, as the potency of that individual reality. When viewed in

this manner, nothingness assumes a relative aspect, in opposition

to that reality of which it is the potency, and thus becomes apt to

connote that same reality, in the same way as silence connotes talk,

darkness light, absence presence, informity form. Hence we took care

to say that a thing is brought into being out of _its_ non-being;

because, as the fool only by divesting himself of _his_ foolishness

can grow wise, so a reality which is to come out of nothing--say, a

point of matter--cannot be educed out of the non-being of an angel or

of any other thing, but only out of _its own_ non-being. Consequently,

non-being, or nothingness, as the term out of which a point of matter

is to be educed, means nothing but _the potency of that real point_;

and thus nothingness, under the hand of the Omnipotent, acquires, in

regard to that which is educed out of it, that relativity which is

sufficient to make it a principle, according to the nature and manner

of its principiation.

Some may ask why, among the extrinsic principles of things, we did

not mention God's _archetypal ideas_; for it seems that, when we are

asked whence a contingent being primarily proceeds, we might answer

by pointing out God's ideas as the patterns to which creatures must

conform, and by saying that things primarily proceed _from the divine

ideas_ as from their archetypal principle; and if this answer--which is

by no means absurd--be admitted, the extrinsic principles of contingent

beings will be four, and not three.

But it is to be observed that God's ideas precede all decrees

concerning creation, and are the archetypes not only of all the

things that are created, but of all the things also which will never

be created; and, therefore, God's ideas have, of themselves, no

connection with the _existence_ of contingent beings, but only with

their _intelligibility_. Hence we may argue in the following manner:

The extrinsic principiation of a contingent being cannot be traced

back to any _special_ principle prior to that which is the first

reason of their creation. But God's ideas are prior to God's volition,

which is the first reason of creation; therefore, the principiation of

contingent beings cannot be traced back to divine ideas as a _special_

extrinsic principle.

Nevertheless, since God cannot intend to create anything but according

to his own idea of it, we must own that the divine ideas share in the

causality of things, inasmuch as such ideas are implied in the volition

of producing the objects they represent; and though, of themselves,

they are not a distinct and special principle of creation, yet, as

included in the Creator's volition, they make up the whole plan of

creation, and thus they have a bearing on the nature, number, and order

of all created things.

Such is the doctrine which we find in S. Thomas' _Theological Summa_,

where he explains how God's ideas are the cause of things. "God's

ideas," says he, "are to all created things what the artist's ideas

are to the works of art. The artist's ideas are the cause of a work

of art, inasmuch as the artist acts through his understanding; hence

the form or idea which is in his understanding must be the principle

of his operation, in the same manner as heat is the principle of the

heating. But it must be remarked that a natural form is a principle of

operation, not inasmuch as it is the permanent form of the thing to

which it gives existence, but inasmuch as it has a leaning towards an

effect. And in a similar manner the form which is in the understanding

is a principle of action, not inasmuch as it is in the understanding

simply, but inasmuch as it acquires, through the will, a leaning

towards an effect; for an intellectual form is not more connected with

the existence than with the non-existence of the thing of which it is

the form (since one and the same is the science of contraries); and,

therefore, such a form cannot produce a determinate effect, unless it

be brought into connection with one of the two contraries; which is

done by the will. Now, God, as we know, causes all things through his

understanding, for his understanding is his being; and, therefore,

his science, _as united with his will_, must be the cause of all

things."[184]

It might be here objected that if, for the reason just alleged,

archetypal ideas are not to be considered a distinct principle of

creation, then neither can omnipotence be considered as a distinct

principle; for as archetypal ideas do not principiate anything unless

through free volition, so, also, omnipotence principiates nothing but

in consequence of the same volition; and, therefore, if archetypal

ideas on this account are not a distinct principle of things, on the

same account omnipotence cannot be taken as a distinct principle.

To this we answer that the assumed parity has no legs to stand on.

That archetypal ideas are not a distinct principle of creation was

proved above, not simply by arguing that they cannot principiate

anything independently of free volition, but by showing that it is not

from them, but from the volition alone, that the real principiation

of things begins. Now, this proof applies to ideas, but not to

omnipotence. In fact, ideas, even in God, must be conceived as having

a certain priority with respect to volitions; for it is true, even in

God, that nothing is willed which is not foreknown--_nihil est volitum,

quin præcognitum_. If, therefore, God's ideas were a _distinct_

principle of creation, there would be something in God, prior to

his will, which would entail the existence of created beings; which

is impossible to admit so long as we maintain that God's will must

remain free in its extrinsic operations. We cannot, therefore, admit,

without absurdity, that the archetypal ideas constitute a _distinct_

principle of things. But, as to divine omnipotence, no such absurdity

is to be feared; for God's omnipotence has no priority with respect to

God's will; and thus the above argument cannot be used to prove that

omnipotence is not a distinct principle of creation.