Images de page
[ocr errors]

the section already referred to, the other proofs of Christ's divinity: on the foundation of the Church by Christ: on the 'characteristics of the Church' so established: on the identification of the Church of Christ' -a splendid chapter, containing an account of the Protestant, Greek, and non-Christian religions, that will be looked for in vain in many a tome of a thousand pages, and a vindication of the claims of the Catholic Church to which leading Protestants of the last century are made to contribute their quota: finally, on the government of the Church of Christ,' stating in measured language the case for the Primacy and Infallibility of the Pope, and defending both dogmas against all attacks, ancient and modern. As an appendix to the book I found the monologue of Napoleon, as expressed in the words of Newman. It is one of the finest passages ever penned. Added to most books, it would only bring out their defects by comparison. In Dr. Sheehan's, I can say with truth, it is just the conclusion that we should have expected. When we have read the eleven chapters, we are just in the frame of mind to appreciate the words of Newman, and to accept the striking antithesis without a shadow of doubt or reservation.

We have had books like Dr. Sheehan's already. The Superiors of secondary schools know them well. They admire them, too; and so do I. But I must say they seemed to me, in the main, to suffer from three defects: 1°, they aimed at comprising all the minutiae of scholastic divinity, and discouraged the student with their endless details; 2°, they weakened our position by admitting the questionable statements of over-zealous enthusiasts; 3°, they were, if I am pardoned the expression, too objective and disconnected: the touch of personal sincerity and enthusiasm was wanting; and there was no principle that could combine in a unified whole the myriad of separate statements. Dr. Sheehan has, in my humble opinion, avoided all three defects. He shows a fine contempt for details that have little effect on the main issue, even when those details have the sanction of an honoured tradition: I might cite, for instance, his silence on the puerile objections to the divinity of Christ drawn from the Gospel (St. John's) that is, by universal consent, the Gospel of the divinity. He commits neither himself nor his Church to positions that an honest man would feel qualms in defending: I may instance his treatment of the Galileo case--one of the best things in his book (pp. 128-130)—and his refusal to deal with the Spanish Inquisition (p. 134) on the ground that it was merely an abnormal development of a local, and secular, tyranny. And, running through all his book, unifying the chaotic facts and grouping them all around the central motive, there is the great principle, not so much expressed as suggested, of a personal friendship with the human Christ, and of a loving pride in the Church that, persecuted and defamed, is still the mother of all blessings,' the only institution that has stood the shock of centuries and will live on, unscathed and spotless, until the last syllable of recorded time.' Once that principle is grasped, as it will be wherever Dr. Sheehan's book is taught sympathetically, the rest may be viewed with confidence. The growing man may discover defects in the Church's representatives or

in their practical policy, as he will even in the face of the mother that bore him. But these defects will take their stand in their proper perspective. And, whatever trials or temptations come, the fall will be only temporary: the call of Christ and of His Church will triumph in the end.

The book of which the second volume will appear in due courseis intended for schools and colleges. I see no reason why its use should be so restricted. Even priests, who have studied a scientific course of Theology, will find it an inspiration. And, in every parish in Ireland, there are men and women (especially those who have reador heard of the publications of the Rationalist Press) who would welcome this little book as a veritable God-send. When they read it—and I hope priests will give them the opportunity—they will be able to meet, on fairly equal terms, the genuine exponents of science, and, a fortiori, the million camp-followers who glibly repeat, in the name of 'science,' the very statements that science repudiates.

On the style of the little volume I need say little. Past students of Dr. Sheehan will recall the delicate touch, the artistic reserve, the mastery of tone and diction that marked his contributions-all too few to the records of our literary societies. They will find them all in his latest work. Among the general public, no one will question his classical qualifications: Irish-Irelanders recognize him as an expert writer in the Irish language; this work, to complete the cycle, proves him a master of purest Anglo-Saxon. That is a record to be proud of. And, if I am allowed to pass from 'form' to 'matter,' I may recall the trite statement that, whatever a priest's work may be, there are always the great claims of nationality' and 'religion.' Dr. Sheehan has answered the first already in Irish publications that are part of the national heritage: he answers the second now in a little book that will, I feel convinced, be remembered when the ponderous tomes of more ambitious authors are dead and doomed and forgotten.

[ocr errors]

Some of my encomiums on Dr. Sheehan's book may appear extravagant. I can only give my assurance that they are fully deserved: if anyone doubts, let him get the volume and judge for himself. I read it, as I stated, at a time when works of the kind could make little, or no, appeal: still it produced an impression that, in all sincerity I say it, I can never forget. It gives all the facts recorded in more lengthy volumes; its style leaves them so far behind that comparisons may be neglected; and its price is so small that almost anyone may have it.

Unless I am surprised, it will be adopted in practically all the Catholic secondary schools of Ireland-and of every English-speaking nation that hears of it. And, unless I am still more surprised, its adoption will lead to results of which every Irishman and Catholic will be delighted to hear. Two small works recently have pleased me beyond measure. With one (on Moral Theology and Canon Law) I hope to deal in the next issue of the I. E. RECORD. The other is Dr. Sheehan's.

M. J. O'D.


Rev. Joseph Husslein, S.J. New York: Kenedy.


THE object of this book is to bring home to the every day reader the social message of the Catholic Church to all mankind. She alone succeeded in solving the greatest of social problems in the past, and her lessons are of equal importance in the present time. Naturally a discussion of Socialism bulks largely in the work. As a popular statement of the Church's attitude towards Socialists the following is well worth quoting: The attitude of the Church towards Socialists themselves, at least those who have been misled to follow its will-o'-the-wisp, is one of sorrow and not of anger. The situation was analysed with admirable skill in the Pastoral Address of the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland, assembled in special meeting at Maynooth, February 11, 1914, when they thus explained the motives that too often led men into a mistaken acceptance of Socialism: "The desire of ownership which, within due bounds, is natural and legitimate in man and may be highly commendable, springs from the laudable purpose of providing a stable way for himself and those depending upon him. The real explanation why multitudes of men, otherwise as good as their neighbours, have swelled the ranks of Socialism seems to be, not that they hated private property on principle, but that by nature and in fact they loved to have it, and saw no avenue leading to participation in it except the fantastic way that opens on the dismal swamp where there is to be State ownership of the instruments of production and distribution, and State intrusion everywhere. It is, indeed, the duty of the State to see that the natural resources are turned to good account for the support and welfare of all the people; and, consequently, the State or municipality should acquire, always for compensation, those agencies of production, and those agencies only, in which the public interest demands that public property rather than private ownership should exist." Here, then, is the Catholic point of view both of Socialism and of that State ownership of which we shall have more to say in future chapters. Voluntary Communism of any kind, which does not wish to impose its methods upon others, is quite another matter.'

Father Husslein contrasts the solution of economic and social problems in pre-Reformation days, based as it was on the religious sense of justice and equity, with modern solutions. He has neglected no salient aspect of his subject. He deals with rationalistic capitalism, the ethics of just prices, morality of monopolistic prices, the problem of the middleman, the State and Labour, the State and Wages, duties of Labour and Capital, Strikes and Trade Agreements, the sympathetic strike, the problem of unemployment, the great farm problem, social legislation, domestic control of industries, co-operation, the woman-worker, and Christian democracy. All these subjects are treated clearly and in the light of Catholic principles. In the chapter on Social Legislation there is one remark which we should like to quote as bearing on a state of things arising in our own social system. From the lack of a living wage,' says Father Husslein, 'follows in the next place the need of State support

[ocr errors]

for social insurance of every kind. Thus the workingman becomes a ward of the State, though his contributions of honest labour to the social welfare entitle him to an honourable independence. Obligatory social insurance will, indeed, remain a wise provision under any system of social laws, but with a living wage the labourer will be able to pay in full his own rate, thus preserving his sclf-respect and not transferring to the State the expenses saved to the employer.' Wise words-for the weakening of individual effort and responsibility, through State interference, is a danger only too threatening.


America: A Catholic Review (January).
The Ecclesiastical Review (January). U.S.A.

The Rosary Magazine (January). Somerset, Ohio..
The Catholic World (January). New York.

The Austral Light (December). Melbourne.

The Ave Maria (December). Notre Dame, Indiana.

The Irish Monthly (January). Dublin: M. H. Gill & Son, Ltd.
The Catholic Bulletin (January). Dublin: M. H. Gill & Son, Ltd.
The Month (January). London: Longmans.

Studies (December). Dublin: The Educational Co. of Ireland.
Etudes (January). Paris: 12 Rue Oudinot (VII).

Revue Pratique d'Apologétique (January). Paris: Beauchesne.
Revue du Clergé Français (January). Paris: Letouzey et Ané.
The Fortnightly Review (January). St. Louis, Mo.

The Lamp (January). Garrison, N.Y.

Revue des Jeunes (December). Paris: 3 Rue de Luynes.

The Homiletic Monthly (December). London: Burns & Oates.


The Universe (January). London: Effingham House, Arundel Street.

Our Boys (January). Edited by the Christian Brothers. Dublin.

The Casuist, Vol. v. By Rev. J. A. M‘Hugh, O.P. London: Herder.
An Elementary Handbook of Logic. By John J. Toohey. New York:

Schwartz, Kirwin & Fauss.


Portraits de la Belle France. Par Maurice Talmeyr. Paris: Perrin et

Un Grand Français: Albert de Mun. Par Victor Giraud. Paris: Bloud et Gay.



Of all the doctrines taught by the Church there is not one that is so terrible in itself, or that so scares and harrows up the soul, as the doctrine of eternal punishment. It so terrorizes the sinner, that he scarcely dares to allow his mind to dwell upon it. In fact, there is a strong disposition, outside the Church, to dismiss it altogether as a relic of a barbarous and bygone age, when designing priests sought to influence their superstitious subjects by the wildest appeals to an already overwrought imagination. In these days unbelievers are already showing an indignant impatience of the doctrine, and a vast number have absolutely ceased to believe in it.

It is almost universally felt [says Rev. R. Campbell, a Protestant ministe] that belief in hell and belief in divine love are not mutually compatible especially if hell be unending. Even divine justice is difficult to understand in such a connection; for the worst sin that could be sinned hardly seems to deserve on human analogies an eternity of punishment.

And again:

Most people feel, and very naturally, that if God visits wrong-doing with pain, His object must be the good of the transgressor, and not the vindication of His own dignity, or the maintenance of His own security. A God who merely tortures the damned, without hope of remission, cannot, it is urged, or rather assumed, be benevolent in any intelligible sense.1

W. H. Greg expresses himself in similar terms. He


The common feelings of humanity and the common sentiments of justice which lie deep at the heart of our nature, have, in this instance, proved too strong for the reiterated assertions of an eternity of punishment, and have steadily refused to accept so terrible a tenet. ... No subtlety of logic, no weight of authority, will induce rightly constituted minds, which allow themselves to reason at all, to admit that the sins or failings of Time can merit the retribution of Eternity-that finite natures can, by any guilt of which they are capable, draw upon themselves torments infinite, either in essence or duration. Divines tell us that no 1 See Pearson's Magazine, for June, 1916.


« PrécédentContinuer »