In Defense of Religion and the Dignity of Labor OR * ? Can There Be True Morality Without Religion in Any System of Education? By REV. JOSEPH J. O’CONNELL RECTOR ST. STEPHEN’S CHURCH PORT CARBON, PA. In Reply to ROBERT F\ DITCH BURN Supt. of Public Schools at Tamaqua, Pa., anti President of the Edu¬ cational Association of Schuylkill County, Pa. PUBLISHED BY CHRONICLE PUBLISHING CO. Pottsville, Pa., 1905 Air. Ditchburn’s Lecture Alay be Found as an Appendix to This Pamphlet All Rights Reserved Third Edition Single Copies 10c.; $0.00 per 100; $55.90 per 1,000 — - WORKING MEN INFERIOR ANIMALS From Brann's Iconoclast of July, 1903. Harrison Smalley, instructor in the Department of Economics at the University of Michigan, in one of his recent lectures, said: “But, comparing men purely as animal matter, the laborer is an inferior animal. A hundred years ago it was believed that all men were created equal; that theory was all in the air. Thus we have come habitually to underestimate the fact—fact, I say—that some men, as some animals, are inferior to others. “This difference exists in all animals. We see it in the breeding of horses and dogs. Some horses are worth $5, where others are good for hundreds, and only blood and birth make the difference. “The laborer has not the rich, warm, blue blood which denotes physical superiority.” This man Smalley, or, to be more accurate, this “Smalley” man, gives form and utterances to a sentiment and belief that is now being engendered in all commercialized, trust-endowed colleges and univer¬ sities, and the virus is spreading rapidly to other institutions of learn¬ ing. It is this kind of doctoring that touches the gizzard and calls forth large donations in the name of “education” and “philanthropy.” “A hundred years ago it was believed that all men were created equal. That theory was all in the air.” It lias always been “in the air” so far as despots were concerned. Nobody who wanted to rob, kill, or oppress his fellow man ever had any use for the declaration, that “all men are created equal.” Nobody, a hundred years ago, or at any other time, ever believed that all men were created equal, physically, mentally, or morally. But the found¬ ers of this Republic believed, and declared it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are created equal with regard to their inalienable rights to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and a voice in their own gov¬ ernment. A hundred years ago that great truth was disputed by snobs, plutocrats, kings, tyrants, thieves and murderers, just as it is denied to-day by parasites, pirates and pin-lieaded professors. Thousands of years ago—when men were only a little higher than monkeys—Smal¬ ley’s theory anent the “inferiority” of the “laborer” was universally ac¬ cepted without question or comment. Every achievement of science, education, art and invention stands as a monument to the man who works. This “inferior animal,” in every age and clime, has tilled the fields, bridged the rivers, tunneled the mountains, torn from the bosom of the earth every ounce of iron, silver and gold, in use by man; built every vessel that plows the seas, constructed every road-bed, every train, and his hand is on the throbbing throttle of the mighty engine that moves the industrial world. His ideas are woven into the warp, and woof of every garment of glory that decks the form of the rich and mighty. There is no hovel and no palace that he did not build! no town or city that his hands did not rear. The laborer—the com¬ moner is the Atlas upon whose broad shoulders rests this majestic world. He has ever been the herald and pioneer of progress. Every human being who has helped to enlighten, beautify, advance and glor¬ ify the world and restore man to his heritage as the offspring of God, belonged to the laboring class—insulted and denounced by Prof. Smal¬ ley as an “inferior animal.” Professor Robert F. Ditchburn, Superintendent of Public Schools at Tama qua, said in the Pottsville Evening Chronicle of Jan. il, 1904: “POVERTY IS A STANDING MENACE.” “Morality is never high where people have to struggle from early morn till far into the night for the meanest neesssaries of life. The morality of an empty stomach is a weak one, and the lady was right when she said T always feel most Godly in good clothes.’ Morality is alwajs low in mean, miserable tenements. We ought not to expect much from children reared in a filthy alley, their neighbors on the one side li\ ing in a stable and on the other in a hog pen.”—There is a deep significance in the word ‘poor but honest.’ ” I is said that: “Great minds run in the same groove!” \ ST. STEPHEN’S PARSONAGE AND CHURCH, PORT CARBON, PA ST. STEPHEN’S SCHOOL AND CONVENT, PORT CARBON, PA. « “FIAT LUX” THE LATEST AND BEST ON THE “PERENNIAL SCHOOL QUESTION” IS IReltgtonr jfloralttp “Can tftctc 6e Ctue eporalitp in anp of CDucation toftfcout Eeligionf ” BY THE REV. JOSEPH J. O’CONNELL RECTOR OF ST. STEPHEN’S CHURCH, PORT CARBON, PA. PUBLISHED Cunt Prantegu fempraorum AND COMPRISING The Published Views of Non-Catholic Statesmen, Churchmen and Editors from Washington to Roosevelt, inclusive, in regard to the necessity of “ Religious Education ” for the children of our land What the Reviewers say of It The pamphlet is a notable addition to the literature on the school question. —Holy Family Magazine. These articles are remarkable for their logic and reasonable tone. — Catholic Standard and Times. The soundness and vigor of Father O’Connell’s work are unquestionable. —Catholic News. The pamphlet is well worth buying and keeping and consulting.— Sacred Heart Review. The pamphlet will prove a handy magazine for those who have to deal with the school question.— Ave Maria. What Churchmen say of the Pamphlet It is the clearest, cleverest and most comprehensive treatise on the subject that I have yet seen.— The Right Kev. John W. Shanahan, D.D., Bishop of Harrisburg, Pa. I am glad to have in so convenient a form so many valuable quotations from such prominent people.— The Right Rev. Michael J. Hoban, D.D., Bishop of Scranton, Pa. The pamphlet has my highest com¬ mendation. I could wish to see a copy of it in the hands of every family in the land.— The Very Rev. P. J. Garvey, D.D., Rector of St. Charles’ Seminary, Overbrook, Philadelphia, Pa. Its statements are clear, its argu¬ ment forcible, its conclusions logical, and its quotations extremely valuable. —The Very Rev. Daniel I. McDer¬ mott, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. I have read “ Religion and Moral¬ ity ” with great interest, and I am con¬ vinced that its wide circulation would result in great good for the cause it so ably defends.— The Rev. Hugh T. Henry, Litt D., President Roman Catholic High School, Philadelphia,Pa. The clear, strong reasoning and the array of non-Catholic authorities, make this pamphlet a notable contribution to the literature of true education.—'1 he Rev. Philip R. McDevitt, Super¬ intendent Philadelphia Parish Schools. Your pamphlet is a marvel.— The Right Rev. Mgr. J. S. Lynch, D.D., Utica, N. Y. I thank you for your excellent pamphlet on “ Religion and Morality.” Send us three hundred more.— The Rhv. William F. McGinnis, D.D., President I. C. T. Society, Brooklyn, N. Y. The pamphlet is worth a library of books on the school question.— The Rev. P. J. McMahon, Minersville, Pa. I thank you for having given us such a pamphlet on the school question. —The Rev. A. Meuwese, Mt. Carmel, Pa. Your articles on morality have our united support.— Council 618, K. of C., Shenandoah, Pa. Second edition, revised and enlarged, now in press. Single copies, 10 cents ; per hundred, $6.00; by the thousand, $55.00 CHRONICLE PUBLISHING CO. PRESS, Pottsville, Pa. IMPORTANT! A Companion to This Pamphlet Is Now in Press The New Pamphlet Answers Objections Raised by Catholics to Parish Schools, As This One Answers Objections Raised by Non-Catholics. FIRST EDITION NOW IN PRESS. Price, ioc.; $ 6.00 Per ioo Copies, Chronicle Publishing Co. Pottsville, Pa. jFVom the Vothtnlle Saturday Night Review, July 2, 1901^: If you are engaged in the work of religious education, then freely circulate this pamphlet among your people and they' will become better informed as to the necessity of religious education and your burdens will be considerably lightened thereby. If you contemplate entering on the work of religious education, then freely circulate this pamphlet among your people and they will readily be convinced as to the neces¬ sity of the work you are about to undertake. If you are indifferent or opposed to religious educa¬ tion, then lead this pamphlet and consider what so many men of every denomination, statesmen and collegemen, have said on the subject, and doubtless your views may undergo a very radical change. If you will not read the pamphlet for the information it contains, then read it for pleasure and pastime. It will afford you both. But read it, hand it to your neighbor, and distribute them among your people and friends, as it concerns people of every denomination, and every man that labors for a livelihood should read its pages. This much is certain. All concerned owe something of gratitude to the person who bestowed so much time and labor in collecting and compiling into such admirable form and inviting style all these valuable quotations, which otherwise might have been lost to the cause of religious education. Religion and Morality By Rev. Jos. O'Connell, Rector of St. Stephen’s Church, Port Carbon From the 1 FottsvUIe. Fa.. Evening Chronicle,. June Z8', 19V4.J We are pleased to inform the read¬ ing public that, after many unavoida¬ ble delays, the pamphlet on "Religion and Morality,” prepared by Rev. Jos. J. O’Connell, Rector of St. Stephen’s church, Port Carbon, Pa., is now ready and will be on sale at The Evening Chronicle Office on and after tomorrow. This very important con¬ tribution to the school question should receive careful consideration at the hands of all concerned in the work of education. The occasion of this pamphlet, as all will remember, was a lecture on morality delivered at Fottsville on Jan. 11, 1904, before the Educational Association of Schuylkill county by the president, Robert F. Ditchburn, who is also Principal of Public Schools at Tamaqua. To that lecture Father O’Connell took exceptions, and, through The Evening Chronicle, re¬ sponded thereto on Feby. 25. So great was the demand for his able article, that the edition of The Chron¬ icle was soon exhausted, and, in com¬ pliance to numerous requests, Father O’Connell promised to give the article to the public later on. and in a much enlarged condition and in the form of a pamphlet. The pamphlet deserves careful con¬ sideration for more reasons than one. Although prepared by a priest of the Roman Catholic Church, and by one who has erected and most successfully conducts a flourishing school in his parish at Port Carbon, yet, in his pages, he does not handle the question from the viewpoint of the Catholic Church alone. But, on the contrary, it would appear that he is not at a loss to prove his position from other au¬ thority than the teaching of the church before whose altar he serves. It would also appear that for years he has, like the thrifty husbandman, been collecting and classifying from the four points of the compass all that has been said by churchmen, statesmen and collegemen outside of his own de¬ nomination in regard to the necessity of religious education. And now he brings forth his collection in battle ar¬ ray, to prove his position in an argu¬ mentative and logical manner. And he does so very conclusively and with respect for the sensibilities of all his readers. Unfortunately it has too of¬ ten happened in the past that those who have treated the subject' witli which Father O’Connell deals have- come out of the conflict with wounds,, and did not benefit the cause which they endeavored to defend. In Father O’Connell’s pamphlet there is to be found neither bitter zeal nor denom¬ inational feeling. The statements of men of every denomination are re¬ spectfully presented and the reader is left to draw his own conclusions. From Washington to Roosevelt, he quotes nearly every man worthy of note who has spoken on the subject. So moderately and charitably does he treat his subject that his work has met the approval of so conservative a churchman and patriotic a citizen as Archbishop Ryan, and all those asso¬ ciated with him in conducting the af¬ fairs of the great Diocese of Philadel¬ phia. In the brief preface to his work he very modestly lays no claim to origin¬ ality and reminds his readers that the pamphlet is only “a compilation.” Whilst the latter may be true to a cer¬ tain extent, yet we give him credit for compiling the matter in a most origin¬ al, inviting and pleasing manner, the most so, indeed, of any treatise on the subject we have yet read, and we have read quite a few. He not only deals with the sub¬ ject of “Religious Education” in a very able manner, but he also ably refutes the statements of Professor Ditchburn, who said that “Morality is never high among those who trudge for a living.” The refutation of that statement should be read carefully by every working man in the land. We feel that we are not doing justice to the pamphlet when we say that the first edition should have a run of at least 50,000. This circulation, and even a greater one, can readily be at¬ tained, if those in whose power it is to do so will but place copies of the pam¬ phlet where they will do most good, and thereby will they remove the grossly erroneous impressions that have so long prevailed in regard to those who have either supported or defended religious education. This can be done because the pages are written for and will be of interest to men of every denomination, and even to those who have no religious convictions, as well as to the “poor, but honest working man.” In Defense of Religion and the Dignity of Labor OR Can There Be True Morality Without Religion in Any System of Education? By REV. JOSEPH J. O’CONNELL RECTOR ST. STEPHEN’S CHURCH PORT CARBON, PA. In Reply to ROBERT F*. DITCHBURN Supt. of Public Schools at Tamaqua, Pa., and President of the Edu¬ cational Association of Schuylkill County, Pa. PUBLISHED BY CHRONICLE PUBLISHING CO. Pottsville, Pa., 11)05 Mr. Ditchburn’s Lecture May be Found as an Appendix to Tills Pamphlet All Rights Reserved Third Edition Single Copies 10c.; $0.00 per 100; $55.00 per 1,000 WHAT “TRUTH” OF NAZARETH, N. C. HAS TO SAY OF “RELIGION AND MORALITY.” Can There Be True Morality Without Religion in any System of Education ? By Rev. J. J. O’Connell, Chronicle Pub¬ lishing Co., Pottsville, Pa. This is one of the best resumes of matter pertaining to the present school question in the United States—that is, the Catholic posi¬ tion of denominational schools receiving sup¬ port for the amount of secular education im¬ parted, and yet not denying to children their religious training as is now done under our public school system. This little work is quite a thesaurus of facts and arguments strongly set forth and deserves the highest praise. We trust to see it have a large sale. Single Copies ioc.; $6.00 per ioo. M. M. r PREFACE On account of the numerous requests we have received from men of every denomination and profession for copies of our article on “Religion- and Morality,” we have felt encouraged to have it printed in pamphlet form, both that we might supply the demand and at the same time give to the article a “more permanent form and a wider circulation.” To the objection that “this pamphlet is unduly prolonged” we would* answer, that, since the defenders of religious education have so long been misunderstood and misrepresented, we felt obliged to incorporate into theso pages every published statement of prominent non-Catholic and profes¬ sional men who have raised their voices in the defence of religious educa¬ tion for the youth of our land. Very often the non-Catholic has imagined that only the Roman Catholics defended and supported denominational!’ schools, and by so doing they were at variance with American institutions. The Roman Catholic has very often imagined that only those of his belief favored or were burdened with the responsibility of such schools. To both, and to all men, we would respectfully suggest that they read care¬ fully the following pages and they will learn what the leading men of every denomination of our country have to say on the subject and they may then acknowledge that the pamphlet is not “unduly prolonged.” In order that all may be thoroughly informed in regard to the lecture which called forth this answer and pamphlet, we take the liberty to ap¬ pend hereunto in Section 8, Mr. Ditchburrrs article as printed in the Potts- ville.papers of January 11, 1904. Further, let us say that in this pamphlet there is no attempt at or desire for originality. The reader will readily perceive that it is “a com¬ pilation and not a production.” Nevertheless, we feel obliged to acknow¬ ledge our deep gratitude for the many kind suggestions and assistance re¬ ceived before, and the many words of approval and encouragement received' after, the appearance of our article in the Pottsville “Evening Chronicle,” and “Saturday Night Review” of March 11th and 12th, 1904. We are especially grateful to our non-Catholic neighbors from whom wo have received scores of letters approving our position in regard to “Relig¬ ion and Morality.” Published Cum Permissu Superiorum ■) % How Men View the Article on “Religion and Morality” _ > Holy Family Magazine says: These articles -(on “Religion and Morality”) are so forcible in argu¬ ment, so rich in quotation, they are so valuable to all interested in this much discussed aspect of the educational problem, that they should be printed in a pamphlet, for the double purpose of giving them a more permanent form and a wider circulation.” Catholic Standard and Times Says: These articles (on “Religion and Morality”) are remarkable for their trencheat logic as well as their persuasive and reasonable tone. We hope to be able to give a fuller idea of their style and treatment in a future issue.” The following are samples of the many letters received on the subject: “Rev. Joseph J. O’Connell, Catholic Church, Port Carbon: “Dear Sir:—I am not a member of your church and never will be. I do not see the necessity of parish schools, but I am not opposed to them. I am democratic enough to let my neighbors nurse any set ideas they may have, so long as they do not interfere with my personal rights and liberties. “I will not throw stones at any man or men, because in so doing I would only invite him to hurl back rocks at me. This is a free country for the press and for religion, and I believe that any religion is better than none at all. The people who make the sac¬ rifices that you and your people make for religion and education are to be admired and not suspected. "Every one I met admired and spoke in the highest terms of all you said, and here is my view of it: I am a G. A. R. man. I have led and fol¬ lowed the flag in battle. In calculating our victories we always considered our own losses as well as the enemies* losses. A thousand lost on each side did not constitute a victory for us; but if the enemy lost a thousand and we lost two hundred, that was our victory. But your victory was a clean one. You entered the enemies’ camp; you took their own men; then you arrayed them against their own cause; you charged, silenced their guns, slaughtered them with their own weapons; you did not lose a man and you marched off with colors flying and without a scar. I admire such generalship. They may follow up your rear guard and endeav¬ or to get a shot at you, but my experi¬ ence in warfare has taught me that they ought first to have their plans well laid for retreat. “I for one will be happy to read any¬ thing more you may have to say on that great subject. R. H. S. “Pottsville, March 6, 1904.” “Port Carbon, Pa., March 22, 19 04. “Rev. Mr. O’Connell:—As so many people are expressing their opinion o£ your valuable article on ‘Religion and! Morality,’ let me tell you the views of several in your own town and not of your persuasion. They look on it as being not only a revelation but also an education. I have met few persons* either of your church or otherwise, who had the slightest, no, not even the faintest, knowledge of such facts and convictions as were found in your lucid document of February 26, in The Evening Chronicle. "That men of every denomination should speak as you reported them l could not be convinced, nor would I believe it from your pen, had you not given their names, and when and where they made those remarks, There are very few, if any, in oue town who knew to what extent private schools were encouraged and sup¬ ported by those outside the Catholi« Church. "It has remained for your reverenea to give us all such proofs of that fact as are beyond doubt and are a sur¬ prise and an education. "Anxiously awaiting your article in. pamphlet form, I remain your fellow citizen. "ONE OF MANY.” CONTENTS t —Standard of Morality. 2— Morality the Basis of Society. 3— Wjlio Are the Opponents of Public Schools. . . Statistics .. Churchmen Si»eak . What Newspaper Editors Say. College Presidents . Prominent Individuals . I Church Papers . Marcus A. Hanna.. William II. Taft ;. 1 ^ Non-Catholic Ministers . Daniel Webster .. % i President Roosevelt. George Washington .... Most Rev. 1*. J. Ryan, LL.D. 4— Mr. Ritchburn’s Prison Statistics. 4—A General Review . Is the Working Man a Moral Man? ♦-—A Bit of History of Education. T—Mr. Ditchburn’s Article In Pottsville Papers •-—Something Better.. 1 - » 9-11 11-12 12 - 13 13 - 17 17-19 19 - 20 20 - 23 23-25 25 26 27 - 2 * 28 28 28 28 - 30 30-34 34-40 40-40 46-50 51-52 / Can There be True Morality Without Religion? Beware Of entrance to a quarrel; but, being in, Bear it, that the opposer may beware of thee.—Shakespeare. “Thou comest in so questionable a shape, I’ll cross thee though thou blast me.” —Hamlet to the Ghost To the Editor of The Evening Chron¬ icle: Dear Sir:—In your paper of Janu¬ ary 11, there appeared a lecture of Mr. Robert F. Ditch burn, president of the Educational Association of Schuyl¬ kill County, and superintendent of the public schools of Tamaqua. May I, Mr. Editor, utter a protest against some of the principles ex¬ pressed in the lecture? I ask this privilege not with the in¬ tention of discussing the question of “Morality in Public Schools” or in private schools, or of associating my¬ self with those who are either for or against the system of public school education. My protest concerns not this school system or that school system, but rather, the great truths that are be¬ fore any system—the principles of sound morality. I write this protest both as a min¬ ister of the Gospel of Christ and as a taxpayer of this county, who has a duty and a right to condemn what he considers the unsound moral teaching of a public official whose high calling is the direction of the young. There are many points in the lec¬ ture to which I could invite attention, but there is only one that 1 will con¬ sider in the present article. Others later on. Mr. Ditchburn asks himself. “What Is morality?” In answering the ques¬ tion he tells us that morality consists of the sum of human actions, and that these actions are the effect of environ¬ ment, and that as all men have not and cannot have the same environ¬ ment. it follows that each must have a system of morality peculiar to him¬ self. If these words have any definite meaning it is that there is no fixed, un- • changeable standard of morality. This would make morality something sub¬ jective. and each one would become the judge of the goodness or badness •of his own actions, irrespective of any ^objective principle or law. And, since the actions that constitute this moral¬ ity are the effect of environment which is different for each one, and is only a circumstance or influence sur¬ rounding our moral actions, it would seem to be vain to seek any common standard whereby to determine the goodness or badness of any action. Environment is necessarily diversi¬ fied and always changing, and if mor¬ ality is merely the effect or the sum of these actions, it would seem to follow that the morality resulting from them would also be different and change¬ able. But this destroys the very notion of morality; for an action is only prop¬ erly called mWal or immoral inso¬ much as it approaches to or recedes from some fixed principle or standard of right and wrong. If the environment, age, sex, or condition of one man is such as to make murder seem lawful to him ac¬ cording to his own particular system, then is not he as good and virtuous in killing as another man would be whose own peculiar system of moral¬ ity led him to respect the lives of oth¬ ers? Mr. Ditchburn, as if vaguely aware of the dangerous absurdities to which his theory would lead, asks: “Can we not find a common basis, a point of agreement, by' means of which we may be able to determine the right¬ ness or wrongness, the morality or the immorality of an action?” The answer that he gives is this: “That common basis is life and all that belongs to life.” The answer, Mr. Editor, is one of those vague, general statements that may, in the mind of Mr. Ditchburn, have some definite meaning, but to others it may'" mean almost anything or nothing and conveys no definite idea. If every person has a different and ever varying system of morality pecu¬ liar to himself, it seems difficult to im¬ agine any “common basis,” any “point of agreement,” by r which to judge the morality or immorality' of his actions. Evidently Mr. Ditchburn has read something of the theories of those so- called philosophers who wish to prove that; there is no such a thing as moral¬ ity. and that the circumstances of age. sex. vendition and environment so de- * IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION termine man’s actions that he himself has no re<*l responsibility for his ac¬ tions, any more than they may affect the happiness or development of the human race. It would be difficult to conceive a more erroneous or dangerous doctrine than this; for while such might please those who wish to lead lives of unre¬ strained gratification and pleasure, it ■would open the door to every kind of crime and disorder. f Once let men be convinced that the rnorality of their conduct is deter¬ mined by their environment, or any external condition of age or sex, and there is an end of all social virtue and order. Maty is not such a cumstances; there is changeable standard to direct his actions standard is the same cir- un- creature of a fixed and by which he is Moreover the for all; it serves for young and old, juen and women, for master and slaved This standard of^morality may be regarded as remote and proximate; the remote is the Divine Essence of God, who is perfect and unchangeable; the proximate standard is man’s human nature considered in all its relations— 1. e., in his relations to God, to himself and to all other creatures. When God made man He indelibly stamped upon man’s nature certain principles and laws that are fixed and eternal andvare common to every hu¬ man being. It is true that these immutable laws are capable of different applica¬ tion according to the diversity of cir¬ cumstances, and in this sense a young or ignora.nt person may be less culpa¬ ble in not conforming to the moral law thau an older or more intelligent per¬ son would be; but the standard, the law. is the same for all. To show how misleading is Mr.. Ditchburn's idea of morality let us ask him, if each one is to be a law unto himself as regards morality, why all this hue and cry about the Mor¬ mons? Why cite them before a “Congressional Investigating Commit¬ tee" as to their plurality of wives? And yet, Mr. Editor, those Mormons have asserted, under oath, that they are living and acting in accordance with a revelation from Heaven. Nevertheless, the moral sense of the Nation is shocked at their lives and their "-wives," and our people refuse to have any faith in their “revelation.” Yet their morality is identically as Mr. Ditchburn says, in accordance with their “age. sex and environment!” Again, if each one is to be a law unto himself what shall we say of that heaven boj*n prayer which is the es¬ sence of all prayer — we refer to the “Lord's Prayer” — wherein we say “Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy Will Be Don© on earth as it is in Heaven?” And, again, how are we to under¬ stand the first and great command¬ ment; “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength, and Him only shaft thou serve,” and the second commandment is like unto this, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, for the love of God.” Be¬ cause, to love man for man’s sake would be humanitarianism, but to love men for God’s sake is true religion and morality, according to the law of God, from whom came and by -whom alt things are ordered, and according to whose Holy will and law our actions are right or wrong and not according to our “age, sex and environments.*| The morality in which the superin¬ tendent of schools from Tamaqua glories is what is known as an inde¬ pendent morality. That is, a morality or code of morals that is separated froYn and independent of the Law- Giver. But it is impious to attempt to> account for right and wrong without reference to God, the Giver of the law which has made an act lawful or un¬ lawful. The object of independent morality is to abolish Christianity and the Law-Giver, and to judge a .human act by the dictates of reason. (An act is good morally when in accordance with right reason. But reason to be right reason must be determined by the law of the Creator who gave us that reason, and not by environments or age or sex. For man’s moral ac¬ tions must ultimately relate to God. Thus environments only influence% our actions, by no means cause them.] The Superintendent’s morality w'buld amount to this: Teach children of right and wrong, but say nothing about God, nothing about the Law- Giver, nothing about Christ the Saviour. But such teaching is un¬ christian. We, therefore, assert that indepen¬ dent and self-constituted morality without God for school children is im¬ piety bordering on rank infidelity. It seems absurd for Mr. Ditchburn to speak of “higher” or “lower” mor¬ ality after making morality a thing that is not fixed or determined. “High¬ er” and “lower” are relative words, and presuppose some common and de¬ termined standard of comparison, and if morality can be higher or lower, it is so in proportion as it approaches towards or recedes from a certain fixed standard. AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 9 In concluding this article, Mr. Edi¬ tor, I need hardly state, and with re¬ gret, that this lecture which was re¬ ceived so favorably, indicates how vague, erroneous and unsettled in the minds of many teachers is the know¬ ledge of the right principles of mor¬ ality. Moreover, this article and any articles that may follow are not writ¬ ten, as said above, for the purpose of entering into controversy with any person or society. They are written for the reading public who have read Mr. Ditchburn’s article on morality, in order that the same public may know that there is a higher and a more sacred standard of morality than that which Mr. Ditchburn has pre¬ sented in his article of January 11, 1904. 2—Morality the Basis of Society From “The Genius of Christianity” vv’e learn that morality is the basis of society, but religion is the foundation on which morality rests or the spring from which it flows. Therefore, if you destroy or remove religion you do away with true morality^ { This statement is no philosophical quibble, nor is it a theological distinc¬ tion to mislead the unwary. But it is an eternal fact. For if man were only a material being there would be neither vice nor virtue, and morality would be a reproach to him. Our changeable laws cannot serve as a foundation for morality, because morality is unchangeable. Morality, therefore, must rest on something more permanent than transitory things, which are not an absolute guarantee of reward or punishment for good or evil. Now, that founda¬ tion for morality or spring from which it flows can be no other than relig¬ ion. Common sense will convince any thoughtful man of this fact. For. if every man according to his environ¬ ment or time of life, as Mr. Ditchburn tells us, has his own peculiar code of morals, then why are all the ministers preaching the ^Morality of the New Dispensation *>) If we accept revealed religion we look to God as our beginning and our end, who will reward or punish us for our actions as they are in conformity or non-conformity with the moral law that He has given to us. Hence it is that from this faith in God’s eternal nature, and an undying hope of reward that will be eternal or punishment eternal, we are impelled or led to the performance of our moral actions. Some have imagined that religion '"'-arose from morality, whereas mor¬ ality springs from religion, since it is certain, as has been shown, that mor¬ als cannot have their principle in phys¬ ical man, and we know from history that as soon as man casts off the no¬ tion or idea of a God, he rushes into every excess and cannot be restrained by laws, nor prisons, nor even the threat of certain death. Hence it was, convinced of this fact, the immortal Washington said in his Farewell Ad¬ dress: “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality: can be maintained without religion.”) The ancients, though wonderful was their progress in the arts and sciences, in music and sculpture, and poetry, and astronomy, and to which fact I respectfully call the attention of the learned professor from Tamaqua, were without the conviction of eternal re¬ ward and eternal punishment, and we know full well how they rushed into every excess known to human passion. Andrwe find in our own day that those whoxave cast, off the restraining in¬ fluences of religion, which would de¬ termine their moral conduct, are rush¬ ing into the adoration of their passion in the most revolting form, and every¬ thing that is in opposition to the moral law. ) The great Washington—we might almost say, in this particular instance, the inspired, but certainly the relig¬ ious Washington—was fully convinced of this fact when he spoke that part of his Farewell Address which I take the liberty to quote in full: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, re¬ ligion and morality are indispensible supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pil¬ lars of human happiness, these firm¬ est props of the duties of men and cit¬ izens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation de¬ sert the oaths, which are the instru¬ ments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution in¬ dulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the in- 10 IX DEFENSE OF KELIOION fiuence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and expe¬ rience, both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in ex¬ clusion of religious principles.” These sacred words are respectfully submitted to the serious consideration of Mr. Ditchburn, and the Educational Association of Schuylkill county. Now, if we as Christian men ac¬ knowledge that revealed religion (and I do not refer to any particular sect or denomination of the Christian Dis¬ pensation) is the support for morals, how can we expect true Christian morals to exist in the heart, in the home, in the institution, public or ;private, where religion is not only not taught, but positively ignored by the infidelity of the individual or prohib¬ ited by State laws? But you immedi¬ ately ask me: '‘Would you then say that such institutions are ungodly, im¬ moral and irreligious?” No, dear reader, the terms are tod harsh to be ■addressed to your refined ears, and no cause can be properly presented by the use of harsh terms. Now, if the ■ State very wisely prohibits the teach¬ ing by the State of any religion what¬ ever in our public institutions it does not follow that the Christian gentle¬ men engaged in those institutions are employed in teaching irreligion or im¬ morality. Such institutions may be called, neg¬ atively, non-religious, nor in the sense that they deny religion, but because of the absence of religious teaching. Nor, again, are they positively irreligious in the sense that they teach what is opposed to religion, unless the servants or agents of the State abuse their po¬ sition and violate the State law. For example, I feel that 1 do not hazard anything when I say that if Mr. Ditch- burn were to teach in the public ;schools of Tamaqua his idea of moral¬ ity as set forth in the press article of Jan. 11, 1904, there are thousands of his fellow citizens of every denomina¬ tion who would accuse him of abusing the confidence of the taxpayers, vio¬ lating the law of the State in word and spirit, and teaching irreligion. Nor. again, would I say that the youth of our county who attend the public schools are immoral and ungodly; for thousands of them are the off¬ spring of God-fearing, church-going, religious, Christian parents, who in¬ struct their children in everything good, so far as time and ability will permit. “Nor am I unmindful of the moral forces that are at w'ork in the public schools of our land. I freely xdmit that there is a power for good in the example of upright and high- minded teachers.” “I grant the humanizing effect of study of good literature, art, music, mathematics—in fact, every branch taught. But what is all this in the face of the difficult task of turning the free will of human beings so perma¬ nently toward the right that they will steadfastly pursue it, in spite of the forces, within and without, which im¬ pel them toward evil?” “Surely anyone who knows human nature will deny that those refining influences of the class-room are suffi¬ cient, of themselves, to give this direc¬ tion to human life. Every man who carefully follows the present day thought, which to a great extent rep¬ resents the intelligence of the nation” — as I shall show in a separate article — must acknowledge that the defects which are pointed out, from time to time, in the public school system, are not the fanciful creations and mere speculative objections of men who are “defamers of the public school, croaks, and birds of ill-omen.” Mr. Ditchburn tells us in his article that “according to the laws of the State education begins at the age of six. but according to the laws of Great Jehovah it begins with the first breath the child draw's.” Here we agree with him for once, but we say the child is, not educated unless a knowledge of the Great Jehovah is from infancy indelibly stamped on the fleshy tablets of the young heart whilst it is still capable of receiving and sure to retain them. The State began by teaching the head; it next proceeded to teach the hand, but when the heart shall have been taught, then only will the pupil have been educated, and not until then. ( This the churches that have schools, with thousands of far-seeing citizens, say is the only true education. And If the churches erect schools at great cost and sacrifice and teach their children to love God and obey the laws of the State, wdll Mr. Ditchburn say they are energies to public schools for doing so? ) The churches recognize that if, not¬ withstanding the efforts of all denom¬ inations to teach the Gospel to all men, still thousands go astray, what must eventually be the result to the millions, if the law of Great Jehovah is not taught from infancy? Again. Father Washington, speak to thy children and say to them: “Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of pecu¬ liar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles.” But, “the minds of peculiar construction” are so few AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR U -mmong the millions that they become the exception and only emphasize the teaching and practice of the churches that support parish schools. The last • census has set the leading minds a’thinking on account of the spread of Infidelity, but the next may impel them to action. Let us hope it may not be too late. We say with our Divine Master: "I am not come to destroy but to build up,” and as progress is the or¬ der of the day. we say progress, and ■"Excelsior,” and God-speed to the free institutions of our glorious country; and perish the thought and withered be the hand that would a’m word or act to overthrow our schools But with the Psalmist we also exclaim: "in vain doth man build a house un¬ less the Lord build with him: In vain doth man keep watch over his city unless the Lord watch with him.” v And, again, our position on the school ^question is not that we love our schools the less but that we love our God, His law and morality, the more. The Church teaches her children not only: “Thou shall not kill,” but she teaches them, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” She teaches them not only, “Thou Shalt not steal,” but she teaches them, "Thou shalt not covet or desire the wrongful possession of thy neigh¬ bor’s property.” The Church teaches her children not only “Thou sha t love thy neighbor as thyself,” but she teaches them in the parable of the good Samaritan, “to love all men as their brethren in Christ Jesus.” She teaches them not only "Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God with thy whole heart and soul and mind and strength, and His commandments shalt thou obey,” but she also teaches them that, “civil law is from God, and that he who resisteth the estab¬ lished law resisteth the order of God and invites the anger of God.” Would you say this work is “treason to State, or enmity to State school?” And, is that majority of the Christian Church that is doing so glorious a work for God and State to be made the subject of covert scoff and sneers and dubbed “a bird of ill-omen?” And all this by a man who sets him¬ self up as an expounder of morality, a leader of youth and a “light in Is¬ rael.” Truly may we say with Ham¬ let: “Angels and ministers of grace defend us.” Without authority to speak or presuming to speak for any denomination or society, whatever, I am at liberty to say with Mr. John W. Willis in the ‘‘Boston Review” of re¬ cent date: ClThe attitude of the Churches (that support parish schools) may be summarized thus: Christians must insist that Christian¬ ity shall be the fundamental teach¬ ings of the schools. They are not, however, to oppose any secular school system of instruction that may be in¬ stituted by the government under which they live. Nor are they to dis¬ courage or hamper its execution.” “The public school system of the United States is as much an object of regard to those Christian men as is the flag, the starry banner of freedom and hope, to sustain which they ever strive and to which they ever bow In reverence.”] 3—Who Are the Opponents of the PubHc Schools? Mr. Editor:—In Mr. Ditchburn’s ar¬ ticle of January 11, last, we read the following: “It is charged by half of the Christ¬ ian Church, and those directly under the influence of such, that our schools do not teach morality; that they are vicious and Godless, wholly given up to material success, wholly of this world, for if we do not teach religious doctrine we cannot teach morality.” Now r , my dear Mr. Editor, it is right¬ ly acknowledged today that the great majority of our people get almost all their information from and have their •opinions formed by the press of our country. Hence that great body of our people who read Mr. Ditchburn’s article have accepted his unqualified and dogmatic assertions, and have no means at their 1 command whereby to further enlighten themselves on the subject. They have accepted hia statements and since the publication of the article which contained the above quotation they are quietly ask¬ ing the following questions: “Why did not the learned professor from Tamaqua mention by name the Church to which he referred?” Did he mean “half of the Christian Church” in the world or in America? Why did he not mention the names of those men who are under the Influ¬ ence of that Church? Many of your readers have said that they might just¬ ly expect from the learned professors, who are “teaching the young idea how to shoot,” so ething more precise and specific, something more than an insinuation on which to form an er¬ roneous conclusion as to the name of ' 1 2 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION Die Church and the names of the men whom Mr. Ditchburn calls “defamers of the public schools, croaks and birds of ill-omen.” Alas, poor Yorick! Again, Mr. Editor, I disavow any in¬ tention or desire to dissuade any per¬ son from his fixed views on the ques¬ tion's being treated. But in this par¬ ticular paper 1 propose to introduce to your readers, as briefly and as far as found in my old newspaper files, the prominent persons, lay and cle.'ical, bf our country, and out of our coun¬ try, who have spoken on the subject ‘of “Religion and Morality,” whether ‘in or out of our public schools. I shall also tell your readers when, where, before whom and under what circumstances those men have spo¬ ken. As to Church statistics I give them as I find them, but no guarantee of their accuracy. Ye “Defamers of Public Schools” speak for yourselves! Statistics in Regard to Denomina¬ tional Schools and Statements of Public Men in Regard to Public Schools. In this paper we desire to present to the reading public and to Mr. Ditchburn in particular some statis¬ tics in regard to parochial schools. We will also present to him state¬ ments of churchmen and statesmen in regard to the necessity of religion in all schools. STATISTICS. Lutheran Statistics on Parochial Schools. The Lutheran Almanac for 1 904 in¬ forms us that the Lutheran Church supports 5,244 parochial schools, in which are being educated 234,175 pu¬ pils in North America. Episcopalian Statistics oil Parochial Schools. The Episcopal Church Almanac for 1901 informs us that the Episcopal Church has 10,856 pupils in the pa¬ rochial schools and 5 36 teachers in North America. The Friends or Quakers, as we all do know, have always taught their child¬ ren in their own private schools. The Roman Catholic Church Al¬ manac for 1904 informs us that the Catholics of North America had at that time 4,000 parochial schools, an increase of 143 over the previous year, and attending those schools were 1,113,031 pupils. Now, according to the Almanacs quoted the Lutheran Church has 1,- 715,910 members; the Episcopal Church has 7 38,9 53; the Roman Catholics, 1 1,289,210. The statistics of “The Society of Friends” I have not at my command, and as to their numbers I refrain from guessing, as it would appear Mr. Ditchburn did in regard to prison statistics. Here, then, are 13,744,073 church members, whose loyalty to the flag is only second to their loyalty to their God, who, with part of what they earn by “trudging from early morn until far into the night,” erect and support their private or parochial schools. But let me ask Mr. Ditch- burn and the members of the Educa¬ tional Association, who “unanimously applauded his article,” will you call J so many of your fellow-citizen© and co-religionists, “birds of ill-omen and enemies to the public schools and seeking for a union of Church and State?” I acknowledge there are many members in the denominations above mentioned who do not, like Mr. Ditchburn, .see the necessity of such- schools, and dissent from the teach¬ ing of their respective churches in re¬ gard to such schools. It is not won¬ derful that among the millions quoted there should be found many dissent¬ ing voices. In every society, religious and secu¬ lar, there is difference of opinion in regard to the most trivial affairs. We had rather to forget the very em¬ phatic difference of opinion that oc¬ curred at our last County Institute, in which the “Educational Associa¬ tion” takes a prominent part. But* are there not thousands, not of those churches that support schools, who, in word and in spirit, approve of such schools ? 'Let me now present to the Educa¬ tional Association, and Mr. Ditchburn in particular, only a few of the pub¬ lished opinions of churches and church men, editors and school men, college presidents and men of thought throughout the land, on the question on religion and morality in the public schools. The Episcopal. The following is taken from The Literary Digest, Vol. VII (No. 7 F 181): “The Episcopalians in general convention have passed the following resolutions: ‘That the Bishops and Clergy remind the people of their duty to support and build up our own schools and colleges, and to make education under the auspices of the Protestant Episcopal Church superior in all respects to that which is af~ forded in other institutions.’ ” AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 13 The Lutheran. The Lutheran Church in its last General Council held in 1903, at Nor¬ ristown, renewed its position in re¬ gard to parish schools wherever pos¬ sible, and exhorted pastors, where schools cannot be supported, to gather the little ones, not yet of school age, into the church or Sunday school-room every day, as far as pos¬ sible, and to have some young ladies o t the parish to teach them the Cate¬ chism and the first principles of re¬ ligion. This is the substance of the exhortation or resolution, as read in “The Lutheran” of some time in November, 1903, but I cannot just now lay my hand on the paper. The Society of Friends. I am informed on good authority that.it is a fundamental principle of the Society of Friends that they teach all their own children in their own schools in their religion and in all godliness. This they do very gener¬ ally. Roman Catholic. The position of the Roman Catholic Church on the school question is evi¬ dent from the fact that she supports 4,000 schools and had enrolled in 1902 1,113,031 pupils. Churchmen Speak. . Rev. Hamilton Schuyler (Protest¬ ant), of Bennington, Vt., said in his baccalaureate sermon ifi that''city on a recent occasion: ^Education which is really valuable to the individual and society must consist in the training of the whole man. The intellect is only a part—the will, the conscience, the emotions—in a word, all that we des¬ ignate as the moral and spiritual must also receive appropriate training and discipline if education is to do its full and perfect work, if it is to be a bless- Inig and not a curse. * * * When learning had almost been obliterated during the middle or so-called ‘dark ages’ it was the church (of that day) Which, alone, preserved literary tra¬ ditions/^) v (Doctor Rainsford (Episcopal) saidj orL February 21, 1899) at New York city:(“Not only should the head and the hand be taught but the soul as well. We fall to recognize this in our schools, yet it is the corner-stone of our liberty. You have got to give re¬ ligious teaching in the schools. The Church as she is today cannot do it in our Sunday Schools.”)) (Bishop Johnson (Episcopal), of Western Texas, on June 10, 1901:) ,4, This inability of the public schools of our land to teach any system of mor¬ als is going to lead, within a few years, to a struggle, the like of which this country lias never seen, and it will be with a generation that believes nothing at all.^) Rev. Mr. Montague Geer (Episco¬ palian) said, before the “Sons of the Revolution” in New York City in Sep¬ tember, 1901, when commenting on the death of our martyred President McKinley, among other things: “Our Godless system of education is a far worse crime than slavery or intem¬ perance. If Jesus Christ were on earth and should enter any public school house, the teacher, acting un¬ der instruction, would show Him the door. Here is our fault, here is our sin.”)) C Dr. Wallace Radcliffe (Presbyter¬ ian), said in part at Washington, D. C., October 7, 1900: “It is something that your children go to school; it is more that they go to a school of your own religious belief. Therefore, we summon you to bring up your child¬ ren in your own faith. Let us estab¬ lish schools and teach our religious convictions.’’) Rev. Dr. E. T. Wolf, professor at Gettysburg Theological Seminary, said before the Evangelical Alliance, as re¬ ported by the Philadelphia Press of December 4, 1901: “Every faculty ex¬ cept the highest and noblest, is exer¬ cised and invigorated (in our public schools); but the crowning faculty” — that which is desig-ned to animate all others — -“is contemptuously ignored; and unless its education can be se¬ cured, our young men and women will be graduated from our schools as moral imbeciles. This country is fac¬ ing a grave social problem.” Rev. Henry C. Minton (Presbyter¬ ian). Moderator of the General As¬ sembly, said at Philadelphia, May 19, 1901: “The faith of our sons and our daughters is involved and the king¬ dom of God in this country is in¬ volved. Our school system is not an organized skepticism, but a God-for¬ gotten secularism.” ( Rev. Dr. David H. Greer (Episco¬ pal), said before the General Episco¬ pal Convention at Washington. D. C., Oct. 22, 1898: “The Episcopal Church is not satisfied with the pres¬ ent system of public schools, because religion is not taught in them. These schools should not only turn out well- equipped young men and women, but Christians as well.” ) The same Episcopal Convention de¬ clared: “Surely every Christian will rejoice to have such religion given (in our public schools) so that our child¬ ren will not grow up wholly irrelig¬ ious and thus become a menace to the well-being of society.”) The same Rev. Montague Geer said in the New York Sun, September 30, 1903: “We are bringing up all over 14 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION this broad land a lusty set of young pa¬ gans who, sooner or later, they or their children, will make havoc of our institutions. Lynchers, labor agita¬ tors and lawbreakers generally are human guide posts, with arms, hands and fingers wide extended, and voices at their loudest, pointing us to the ruin which awaits society, if we perse¬ vere in the road which we are now taking.” Said the same Rev. Mr. Geer: ‘‘It was the Rev. D. A. A. Hodge, a cele¬ brated Presbyterian divine and edu¬ cator of Princeton Theological Semi¬ nary, who used there, none too strong, words in an article entitled Religion in the Public Schools: ‘Under these problems there lurks the most tre¬ mendous and most imminent danger to which the interests of our people will ever be exposed, in comparison with which the issues of slavery and of intemperance shrink into insignifi¬ cance.’ ” In view of the entire situation shall we not all of us who really believe in God give thanks to Him that he has preserved the Roman Catholic Church in America today, true to that theory of education upon which our fathers founded the public schools of this na¬ tion and from which they have been so madly perverted. Rev. Montague Geer, in New York Sun, October 25, 1903, said: “Nor is it enough to say that the Church and the home must attend to the religious instruction of the young, because, in their influence over children both Church and home are being weakened and slowly undermined by our “mad¬ ly perverted system of secularized education.” Said he: “The Roman Catholic Church is \vinning and holding the love of her children by reason of her great sac¬ rifices for their moral and religious, as well as for their mental training.” Rev. Robt. Ellis Thompson, D. D., president Central Public High School, Philadelphia: “As to the sufficiency of religious instruction in church and Sunday school, we reply that one of the first practical dangers of society is that the greatest truths that bear on human life shall come to be identified in the fj public mind with Sundays, churches and Sunday school. “We certainly are helping that when we provide that the most aroused activities of a boy’s mind shall be divorced from those truths, and that the subject of science, literature and history, with which church an0 many thi.igs. which may prove of use io them individually, but not trained ■n those ideas of religion and morality which have been rightly regarded as essential to the safety of civilized com¬ munities. I confess that I share some Df the apprehension of those advocates r>f church-schools; but I am very far from agreeing with them as to the propu* remedy. 1 believe that both in school life and in after life the moral training and the secular training must be so interwoven that each becomes a part of the other.” The President of Princeton Speaks. Ke says in advocacy of the religious idea: “A father may well feel that his son’s refined demeanor would be a poor off-set to his loss of religious faith.” President Hyde, of Bowdoin Col¬ lege, said before the Massachusetts Teachers' Association of Boston, Nov., 1896; '‘The public schools must do more than it has been doing if it is to be a real educator of youth and an ef¬ fective supporter of the State. It puts the pen of knowledge in the child’s hand, but fails to open the treasures of wisdom to his heart and mind.” Dr. Butler, of Colby College, Me., Speaks: “We are beginning to see that it is as unscientific to ignore the moral and religious element in education as it would be to ignore the facts of physi¬ ology, hygiene or psychology. Morals and religion are just as much a neces¬ sary part of human life as digestion or sleep. If you do all else and neglect the part that has to do with the sense of individual responsibility to one’s fellow-men and to God, you run im¬ mense risk, not only of making all else useless, but of making it a. posi¬ tive menace to self and society.”) (Professor Brumbaugh, former com¬ missioner of education to Porto Rico, said recently before the Philadelphia Mothers’ Club: “All persons are di¬ vided into three classes—immoral, moral and religious. The immoral person lives below his best thought; the moral person lives up to his best thought; the religious person is will¬ ing to accept a guide above thought. Religious principles should be taught in the public schools. A child should be taught reverence for religious things from his earliest period of con¬ sciousness.” i Dr. Levi Seeley, of the State Normal School, Trenton, N. J., says: “The more educators come to realize that there is a philosophy of education, the more profoundly convinced are they that there is something radically lack¬ ing in the American school system.” The same Dr. Seeley, said in the “Educational Review,” Feb’y, 1898: “A little less than 50 per cent, of all the children in our country frequent any Sunday school. The meaning of these figures is simply overwhelming. More than one-half the children of this land now receive no religious education. Even this feature does not show all the truth. It seems to admit that those who attend Sunday school are receiving proper religious instruction; but everyone knows this cannot be granted.” PROMINENT INDIVIDUAL* CITIZENS. Hon. Amasa Thornton, of New York, said in the “North American Review” for Jan’y, 1898: “The children and youth of today must be given such in¬ struction in the truths of the Bible and Christian precepts as will prevent them in mature years from swinging from their moorings and being swept into the maelstrom of social and re¬ ligious depravity, which threatens to engulf the religion of the future. Such instruction can only be given suc¬ cessfully by an almost entire change of policy on the question of religious teaching in public schools, and the en¬ couragement of private schools in which sound religious teaching is given.” Mr. Frederick Woodrow said in the “Age of Steel” for October, 1896: “If the heart is not educated with the head, the conscience with the memory, a knowledge of arithmetic and skill in penmanship, (a knowledge) of the date of the battle of Bunker Hill, and the number of gallons of water in Lake Michigan, are no guarantee that the man will not use his acquired knowledge in putting the finishing touches to as consummate a scoundrel as ever entered a prison cell.” On May 26, 1899, David G. Cope¬ land, who is much interested in edu¬ cation, said at Washington, D. C.: “The present day system of teaching in our schools is radically wrong and must be injurious to the scholar. There is no pointing upward to virtue, to purity, and to God.” “The Federated Catholic Societies of America,” In convention at Detroit, in January, 1904, declared their posi¬ tion on the school question to be as follows: “That there shall be no pub¬ lic moneys paid out for religious in¬ struction in any school. Let the State examine parish or private schools, and if on examination it is found that they are giving the children an education AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR w hich comes up to the requirements •of the State, then let the State pay *or it.” Mr. William Edward Gardner, in the “Churchman,” Feb'y 20th, 1904, said: “I dare to think that I am one a large number who are fully con¬ vinced that no power has appeared in history, capable of guiding, stimulat¬ ing and making intelligent personal devotion, that can compare with the pow'er emanating from the historic Jesus Christ and the resultant move¬ ment—Christianity; and the public ed¬ ucators can never accomplish their greatest work until they have faced :he issue and satisfied the public mind is to the vitality of the phenomena of Christianity and its place in the educa¬ tional system of to-day.” In the Boston Review, Sept. 26, 1896, We Read the Following: “The disposition to malign the Church and to misrepresent her doc¬ trines is a curious phenomenon,” says John W. Willis, a Protestant, in a newspaper contribution. “It is, never¬ theless, an evident fact. It is often boldly declared that the Catholic Church „is opposed to the public school system, which has been established (n the various States of the federated republic known as the United States af America. No such proposition can be derived from the authoritative :eachings of the Church, from the con¬ duct of her adherents. The Catholic Church in the United States has held three plenary councils. In these coun¬ cils a great number of decrees have been registered. Not one of such de¬ crees contain any condemnation of the public school system nor any declara¬ tion of a purpose to impair its func¬ tions or restrict its ^cope. No conven¬ tion of Catholics—no Catholic Con¬ gress—has ever declared against the public school systemO In many sec¬ tions of the United States adherents of the Roman Catholic Church consti¬ tute a majority of the citizens called upon to legislate with reference to the maintenance of the public schools. / Did any one ever hear a Roman Cath¬ olic majority in a township, village or city, voting against appropriations for the public schools or refusing to pro¬ vide suitable^ school buildings? Cer¬ tainly not. The false accusation that the CatholicHjhurch desires to impair or hamper the public system arises from the fact — the simple fact — that the Catholic Church insists upon the proposition that no system of education is complete that is not essentially Christian. {She holds that the most im¬ portant oil-all knowledge is the science of the divine, the knowledge of the will of God. Teaching, as she does, that the existence of a human being commences in this world, but never ends,(she has come to the logical con¬ clusion that no system of education is perfect which does not have fpr its principal object the preparation of mankind for the larger life which lies beyond the grave. According to the Catholic faith, the grave is not a blot upon existence, a baleful ending - to a career, a dark and dreadful vale of tears, but is an open door to a higher, purer, and infinitely grander existence. As the portion of our life which is passed in this world is but a mere fragment of life in its totality, the Catholic Church believes that educa¬ tional systems should consult the good of the individual in the immortal life, rather than facilitate merely the exer¬ cise of those functions necessary for the material good attainable in this world. \“T he word ‘educate’ (from the Latin wore! educere) means to lead forth into activity the various faculties of the human intellect and the human soul.^ The Catholic Church not only teacnes that reverence for Almighty God is the supreme duty of every man and of every woman, but seeks to lead out from the recesses of the soul, heart and reason, those vital qualities which an hmnortal soul needs for its exaltation in the coming life, that grander life which begins at the point which we, in our unthinking sad¬ ness, call death. “The Catholic Church, therefore, can not advise her people to make use of any school system which is not pre¬ eminently and distinctively Christian. She. therefore, provides schools of her own, and invites her people to edu¬ cate their children in such schools. This does not imply any hostility to a school system which is non-religious. “The writer has never heard from Catholic ecclesiastics any expression of hostility to the public school sys¬ tem. On the contrary, the general tone of remarks among Catholic priests and laymen alike, is one of congratulation upon the existence of all agencies which tend to stimulate thought and advance intellectual de¬ velopment. The mere fact that the Church can not advise her people to make use of a plan of intellectual de¬ velopment, which is not combined with spiritual teaching, does not forbid her people to aid in the upbuilding and expansion of- all instrumentalities adapted to the promotion of intellect¬ ual culture.” *2 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION ANGLICAN MINISTER ON CATH¬ OLIC SCHOOLS. Eloquent ami Generous Tribute Voiced at a Prize Distribution. t From “Catholic Standard and Times,” May 7th, 1904: The following is an extract from the speech delivered by Rev. Dr. Todd, an Anglican clergyman, at the distribu¬ tion of prizes held in connection w r ith the Sisters of Mercy school, Midland Junction, Western Australia. Bishop Gibney and Father Morris (pastor of Midland Junction) were present. Dr. Todd took as his subject “The Educa¬ tion Given in the Catholic Schools,” and after some preliminary remarks Baid: I am, like Moses of old, a man of slow speech. I hardly know where to begin. I have been asked to testify as to what I know of the work of the Catholic schools. It gives me great pleasure to say that I have been a fre¬ quent and welcome visitor here; that the reverend mother and Father Mor¬ ris have afforded me the fullest, oppor¬ tunities of examining the children on subjects taught. My testimony is that the -work done in the past year is ex¬ cellent. I take it, my Lord Bishop, that you founded this school—first, to give a good elementary education to Catholic children and such non-Catliolic chil¬ dren as might attend. Your schools are doing in this direction a work as good as that, done by the State schools. From one point of view they are do¬ ing better work, because they are do¬ ing it without any such generous sup¬ plies of apparatus—improved desks, maps, stationery, tools, etc.—as are given by the State to its schools. And In the second place, I take it, my Lord Bishop, that you founded these schools to give the children of your church sound instruction on the Catholic faith. I have no doubt but that this work is as ably done as the secular work. I admire the principle, I com¬ mend all who will hold that the teach¬ ing of religion should go hand in hand with secular teaching. Religion is the foundation, the rule, the motive of every life which can be called a life at all. Man has a body and man has a mind, but man is a spirit, and if we neglect that life of the spirit, which Is the divinest part, we neglect all the noblest faculties which constitute the dignity of man’s nature. Wrongs Done to the Catholic Commu¬ nity. But because you, my Lordship, be¬ lieve this, and insist upon acting out your belief, the State \vi.i do nothing for you, not even give your schooir an annual inspection to test whether your schools are as efficient as you say they are. Hence the following wrongs are done to the Catholic community: 1. The initial cost—purchase of ground, erection and equipment of these schools—is thrown upon a. relig¬ ious community not the most numer¬ ous or wealthiest in the State. 2. The cost of maintenance of these schools is laid upon you. They are doing good work for the State. The State, I have always held, should pay those who do its work. At the average per capita rate paid for children in the State schools, this school has earned £800. Did the government pay this sum, I am sure we would see an im¬ mense advance in manual training, etc., which cannot be begun for want of funds. 3. Education is not free to all chil¬ dren in the State. Many boast that it is, but the boast must be modified into this—“education is free to all who go to the State schools; it is not free to those who go to the Catholic schools.” Hence it is no wonder that Catholics feel that the old penal law has fol¬ lowed them out to Western Australia. Further, the Catholics have not only to support their own schools, but, as citizens paying taxes, they help to sup¬ port another set of schools from which very few of their children—at least in the metropolitan districts—derive any advantages. I have always main¬ tained that the State should subsidize the schools founded by religious bodies if, in secular education, they came up to the standard of merit laid down by the State for its own schools. Not Prose!ytizers. My Lord Bishop, we read now and again an appeal to the members of the “free” and other churches not to send their children to your schools. I never direct my people to send their children to your schools. I never direct my people to withdraw their children if they go. The parents are free citizens. It would be an impertinence on my part to interfere with their right to educate their children how and where they please. I would, however, speed¬ ily become openly impertinent and in¬ terfere did I see any effort made or had any apprehensions of an effort be¬ ing made to turn them away from or tamper with their faith. We are told that it is on account of that danger thes*» cries of warning are raised, but when it is said that the atmosphere of' these schools is too foetid, too unwhole¬ some for any Protestant child, some evidence to convince the mind should be presented to show that the cry is. AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR *3 needed, that this danger is real. Did I think my children attending this school were being tampered with in regard to their faith, I would leave no •effort unmade to withdraw them. An ounce of fact is worth more than tons of outcries. I have one family whose children at¬ tend this school who have, in fact, never been-to any other but a convent school. It is a strange coincidence, if it be nothing more, that this family is the only family seen as a family in my church; yet tve Church of En¬ gland people are taught, and we pro¬ fess to believe, that the family, not the individual, is the unit in the Christian Church. All the members of this family who have been con¬ firmed are my most regular attend- ers at Holy Eucharist; tw r o of its mem- t>ers are teachers in my Sunday school. The oldest daughter has just received the appointment of organist in my church. She is still in her teens, I be¬ lieve. It speaks well for the musical education she received here that one so young is competent to fulfill the po¬ sition of organist in a church like mine. I do not say this attention to religious duties as a family is caused by the attendance of the children at a Catholic school—-{hat would be to assert an absurdity—but to prove that the atmosphere of this school has in no way lowered their ideals of or be¬ lief in the tenets of the Church to which they belong. There are other children of my church at this school; all are in my Sunday school. In re¬ spectful behavior there, reverence to their spiritual pastor, they are good examples to their fellow-scholars. Of all our university scholars of the Church of Ireland who filled the pro¬ fessorships of mathematics and ex¬ physics in the Catholic seminaries of Ireland—Blackrock, Clongowes, St. Jarlath’s, the Sacred Heart, etc.—I never heard of one who found the at¬ mosphere unwholesome. My only brother filled one of those posts; he is today the rector of Bessbrook. Another Myth. Another myth that has gained ground is that ignorance and supersti¬ tion are characteristic of all Catholics, and that the Catholic priesthood de¬ sire to retain these traits in their peo¬ ple. Why, then, did you build these schools? A paucity of university de¬ grees among the members of a Chris¬ tian people is no sign of ignorance. If it were, then the majority of the •colonial clergy of my church are ig¬ norant men, and I deny that they are. Catholics will go to universities of a certain type only, and prefer to go ''Without university degrees than go to any other. The rising generation of Catholics are not being brought up in ignorance. The best school in this colony is a Catholic school—the Chris¬ tian Brothers’ College ifi Perth. The best school for girls' I ever saw, and I have seen schools the wide world over, was the King’s Inn St. Convent School in Dublin; for boys, I think Blackrock has no superior. Would to God my Church had one such for boys and one such for girls in Perth. My Lord Bish¬ op, I envy you your schools. THE CHURCH AND EDUCATION. (Episcopal.) The Churchman, April 2 3rd, 1904: To the Editor of The Churchman; I never pass one of the Roman Catholic Church’s many institutions for the education of her childreh without doing inward obeisance to her wisdom and faithfulness in regard to this all-important duty; or without an ardent longing that our own beloved branch of the Church Catholic could have her eyes opened to the great work that she could and should do in the same field. In the public schools w r e are con¬ fronted by the problem, “How much and what religion can be taught?” The sacred beliefs of the Christian clash with the heresy of the Jew and the unbelief of the atheist. Conse¬ quently. religious instruction, or even observances, have to be done away with or reduced to the minimum. With what results? We have hardly begun to appreciate them yet, though they are already clearly visible around us. The Roman Catholic Church re¬ gards this state of things, and makes her protest; then, quietly and without loss of time, goes to work to do the only thing that is to be done, erects her own schools and provides her own educational equipments. With what results? Clearly are they, also, vis¬ ible in her growth and ,,5 gor. She reaps abundantly that which she has wisely sown. Do we need to hear aerain the saying of the wise man of old: “Give me'your son till he is ten years old, and you may have him for the rest of his life?” Do we of the Protestant Episcopal Church think it a small matter that the youth of the Church or the Nation be trained up in schools in w r hich the Christian faith is not taught as the all-important element of education? Or is this the time that religious in¬ struction in schools can be safely done away with, when the demands of bus¬ iness and society are making heavier and heavier drafts upon the time of the parents of families, and the bur- 24 IX DEFENSE OF RELIGION den of all instruction, moral and spir¬ itual, as well as mental, is being cast more and more on the “teacher and master?” I would have no one think that T find fault with the public schools, or with their restrictions in regard to re¬ ligion. From the very nature of the case, I can see 710 other method for them to pursue; nor would I interfere wdth one of them. If we cannot have both spiritual and mental training, by all means let us take what good things ■we car. have. Yet the thought of the children of the Nation trained up in schools where the Bible is not read, where Christian hymns are not sung, where they are confronted from ear¬ liest infancy with “I am of Christ, and I am of Moses, and I am of no belief at all — take your choice,” sounds an alarm for the future “like a fire bell rung in the night.” Many Church schools we have that are doing good work, I have no doubt. Yet, certainly, there are not a tithe of what is needed; and many of those we have are but the spoiadic efforts of the individual to fall with the indi¬ vidual, What we need is the recogni¬ tion that for the use of every parish the w<*ll-equipped Church school, of the Church, by the Church, and for the Church, as well as for all outside that desire it, is only less necessary than the well-equipped church build¬ ing itself. Our missionaries perceive this need and strive to meet it. In almost all the mission stations there is an effort made to establish the school. Not less necessarv. I am sure, fs it at home. E. D. WARD. 1713 Q street, NW„ Washington, D. C. PROTESTANT WRITER’S TRIBUTE From “Youth’s Home Journal,” March 26th, 1904: Addressing the Newman Club, of Eos Angeles, Cal., recently, Charles F. Eummis, the w'ell-known editor and writer, who is not a Catholic, deliv¬ ered a ringing address. Among other things he said: “The fact is that the Catholic Church and its schools are the pioneers in Indian education in America. It was not until 1807 that an English-speaking person came to New Mexico. In 1617 there were 11 Catholic churches in New Mexico, and all had their Catho¬ lic Indian schools. The reason why T am opposed to this campaign (against Catholic Indian schools') Is because these are the only schools I know of that are doing the Indians lasting good. Not because of the le- ligion, which is nothing to me, al¬ though it is the Indians*?? religion to a great extent. I do not believe that one should be taken from his fathers faith or his mother’s laith for the- vhim of a school teacher. I am judg¬ ing by the long results. I have not known a child from a Catholic school who had forgotten his parents or hisr language. I have not known any of the girls that have gone wrong in the Indian towns to have come from a Catholic school. Not one! But X have known a good many from Car¬ lisle and other Government schools- Go with me to that exquisitely neat and motherly school of Sister Mar¬ garet. at Bernalilo: go with me to the Albuquerque or to the Santa Fe school, and then let. a man of the- world judge which of those he would choose as a place for his children. If there is any motherly heart in the world, when mothers and fathers are fled away, It is the Sister of Charity. There is something unselfish in that work of love. But T have learned something of experience^ In boyhood I thought they were ter¬ rible: but I have seen them fFhen the biack ‘vomito’ raged in the tropics, and mothers and fathers fled away from their own children and people fell in the streets; and those daugh¬ ters of God picking up the deserted dead and dying. And I have felt their tender mercy myself; and when a man comes to me and says that a child—or a dog—had better be taught by a politician who is reward¬ ed by a place in a Government Indian school than by a Sister of Charity, he wants to bring his fire-escape with him, that’s all. And it seems to me that any American, not to say any Catholic American, could not better- employ part of his inoney than in aid¬ ing the suppoi’t of the Indian schools- conducted by these noble and unsel¬ fish women, 7iow frowned upon and even actively antagonized by the par¬ tisan spirit of our politicians.” CRITICS OF THE PUBLIC SCIIOOCS From Catholic News, April 9th. 1904: At a recent meeting of the Milonian Society, a teachers’ club of Brooklyn Principal D. Claire, of Public School No. 211, gave a summary of the most important criticisms of the public schools. Here is an extract from hb paper: “Fighting Bob Evans criticises New- England education, our. model, in un¬ fitting boys for manlv labor. ‘Each- morning,’ he says, ‘at the Boston Navy Yard gate came a big line of well- dressed boys with shabbily clad par¬ ents. begging me to enlist them as ap¬ prentices to save them from the pool- 100 ms, and worse. There were (el- AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR lows ashamed of their honest parents who had pinched themselves that their offspring might dress like gen¬ tlemen. 1 aimost had m my heart the hope that every high school would burn to the ground and every boy and girl would be compelled to woric with their hands to make a living, as their parents did befoie them.’ “Rabbi Hirscli (.there are other prominent writers who concur) de¬ clares that our present education fails to produce moral here. Crime is in¬ creasing. Forge* s aie good penmen. Actors of immoral plays are good readers. Writers of lewd books are masters of rhetoric. Illustrators of obscene literature have been taught how to draw. Embezzlers are skilled mathematicians. All of the arts we teach in school are capable of making vice and crime more effective. The moral balance is lacking. Without ^ it, education is not only a failure; it is in too many cases an evil success^ “Judge teuton, of Boston, says literacy is not enough: 1 do not ask the criminals any longer, “Can you read and write?” Every one can do that now. 'they have all been to school. The outside of the cup and the platter have been cleaned. The times demand a vital reform. Edu¬ cation is ready for a complete revolu¬ tion.’ “Editor Edward Bok tells his read¬ ers every month that it is putting the truth mildly to state that, of all the American institutions, that which deals with the public education of our children is the most faulty, the most unintelligent' and the most cruel.” The men who speak out thus aue not Catholics, and their criticisms cannot be disposed of in the old- fashioned way of saying that Catho¬ lics never have a friendly word for the public schools. Protestant crit¬ ics are now emphasizing the weak points of the system. If is note¬ worthy that they almost ail agree with the Catholic critics. MARCUS A. HANNA ON CATHOL- CITY. (From Yonkers, N. Y., Home Journal.) Catholics may not be aware that the late Marcus Alonzo Hanna was really a staunch advocate in high places of the claims of the Catholic Church. P. J. O’Keefe tells of some rare com¬ pliments which Mr. Hanna paid to our faith. Some three years ago Presi¬ dent McKinley was particularly anx¬ ious to learn the Catholic view of the administration’s policy in the Philip¬ pines. Mr. Hanna introduced, at a special audience, his lifelong, loyal 2& friend, Rev. P. M. Flannagan, of Chi¬ cago, saying: “Mr. President, I know this man well and can vouch for who and what he is and the great service he has- rendered to his church and country,, and I want you to bear well in mind, his words. And I will go further,. Mr. President, and say to you that the day is not far distant when we shall have a greater crisis in this country than that which we just passed, through. The Catholic Church nas at all times furnished some of the most loyal defenders of our flag, but look, we to it to do more. The day is com¬ ing when treason will rear its head, and socialism become rampant, and in. mat hour, Mr. President (and I am. not afraid to say it here or elsewhere) the Dag must rely on its staunch, friends, and among them, in my opin¬ ion, our greatest protectors will be the Supreme Court of the United. States and the Roman Church.” And again, speaking to a particular friend in most scathing terms of the socialistic agitator and anarchist, Mr. Hanna paid this tribute: “There is a. crisis coming on, which will have to- be met, and the sooner the better- Theie.is no place, and there must be none, in this country, for anarchy and. treason. In this connection 1 once said that in the day of trouble the United States must look to the Su¬ preme Court and the Roman Catholic. Church. I will go further now and. say that I believe the best friend and. protector the people and the flag of our country will have in its hour of trial will be the Roman Catholic. Church, always conservative and fail” and loyal. That is the power I look to to save the nation.” Wherein, then, does the Catholic Church possess that wonderful pow r er for good which our late lamented and. great statesman attributed to her? Certainly in this one fact, that she teaches her children from infancy,, both in her schools and in her churches, that all power and authority of state, justly exercised, is from God,. Herein she has the ear of her child¬ ren ; herein she has the power for country which Mark Hanna attributed to her—and for this she is admired by many, envied by some, a blessing, to all, and the hope of our nation! Nevertheless, by insinuation, Mr.. Ditchburn would offer insult to the- millions of Catholics on whom Mix Hanna said the nation must place so* much dependence in “the hour of trial.” But you will say that Mr. Hanna was a shrewd politician, and was making a grand bid for patronage for his mas¬ ter, President Roosevelt, and, per¬ chance, for himself. Be it so. kind sir. IX DEi'KN^E But you will not say that Wm. H. 'Taft, former governor of the Philip¬ pine Islands, way “seeking foi patron¬ age or bidding for voter;’' when he de¬ livered his memorable- address; before the Presbyterian Social Lnion 01 ! Phil¬ adelphia at its* fifteenth annual dinner -on February 29, 1904. Mi*. Taft had served his country in the Philippines and returned to re¬ ceive the reward of his labors in the Orient, and thus lie spoke on the occa¬ sion above referred to: Win. H. Taft, former Governor of the Philippine Islands, said: “For the great mass of Filipinos our present hope of making them good and useful citizens is, first make them good Catholics. “How can your Presbyterian and other Protestant missions help," lie asked, “in the work of regeneration? By founding SCHOOLS, hospitals, asy¬ lums, by sending your ministers and your teachers, who, by their upright and simple lives will give object les¬ sons of the Christian character. Lit¬ tle, I firmly believe, is to be gained for many, many years in attempts to pros- . -elytize. Not competition, but Christ¬ ian emulation, is the method to be -employed.” But, Mr. Taft, what about the ship¬ loads of public school teachers whom the U. S. Government has sent to those islands to enlighten (sic,) the poor na¬ tives? ^ \ Mr. Taft Tells Us on the Same Feb. 29: “The friars made parishes, taught the catechism, taught useful things. Thus it is that we found ready to our hand more than 6,000,000 of Malays who are Christians and who are re¬ ceptive to our civilization. “No one who knows of conditions as they have been will charge me with partiality to the friars. Still. I will testify to the work and the use¬ fulness of these men of God. The Dominicans established the University of St. Thomas in 1610, long before the ■establishment of Harvard, Yale or any -other American university.” “This sentence, taken from the body ■of the address delivered by Wm. H. Taft, Secretary of War, before the Presbyterian Social Union of Philadel¬ phia, at its fifteenth annual dinner, ex¬ presses the most important part of his talk.” For a certainty we may say: "“Truth, crushed to earth, will rise -again.” Mr. Taft might have said further: The Friars brought with them not only the school books, but they brought, also the crucifix. They not only taught the geography of the OF RELIGION' world, but they taught also the way to God’s kingdom. They taught who was the King of Spain, and they also taught Who was the Creator and King of Heaven and earth. They taught that, punishment would be inflicted for the violation of the laws of the land, and that eternal would be the pun¬ ishment for grievous violations of God’s eternal laws. If they taught the savage how to cultivate the land they also taught him how to soften his heart by the love of God and of his neighbor. If they taught the savage the blessings of civilization they also taught him “the one thing necessary,” the w r ay to salvation. If they taught him to for¬ give and to forget from his heart, they also held up to him the Saviour, dying on the cross for the salvation of all and forgiving all. If they taught the savage that civ¬ ilization was founded on morality, they also taught him that morality was founded on religion, and that if to have a plurality of wives and to murder and steal v r ere opposed to morality and civilization it was also contrary to re¬ ligion and salvation. Did they teach all this to the adult savage? Yes, as far as possible, but the great progress was made by moulding the heart of the young in the school and In the church. Hence, Mr. Taft, with all those who have spo¬ ken before him, says that the first work tov r ard civilization must be done in the schools. He joins with all who have spoken before* him in saying that “without, Christian doctrine one may as w r ell look for Christian Morality as for a superstructure unsustained by a foundation.” In a word, the civilization for which Mr. Taft lauds the Friars in the Phil¬ ippines was not the civilization that springs from a morality of the tele¬ graph and telephone; of the Pullman parlor car and the ocean greyhound; of the smokeless pow’der and the horseless carriage; of the wireless tel¬ egraphy and “Godless education,” but it was the morality of the decalogue and “Jesus Christ and Him crucified’’ —and that was the teaching that made “6,000.000 Malays receptive of our civ¬ ilization”—and that is the education at which Mr. Ditchburn hurls his “slings and arrows” and poisoned darts, and for so doing he has the “unanimous approval of the Educa¬ tional Association of Schuylkill Coun¬ ty.”—“'Tis a nipping and an eager air, my lord.” But. as an antidote for Mr. Ditch- burn' \ poison we take the liberty to her.* present a few bouquets cast at us from “the other side of the house,” a > follows: AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 27 -GREATEST DISASTER THAT COULD OVERTAKE COUNTRY 'WouM be the Putting Out of the Fires That Burn on Catholic Altars, Says Rev. Dr. Fish burn, Presbyterian. The Inquirer, Philada., Mar. 28. True religion is not passing, as some suppose, was the declaration of Rev. W. H. Fishburn last night during his discourse on “The Altar Fires” at the First Presbyterian Church, Cam¬ den. “In these investigating days,” said he, “men are looking narrowly at re¬ ligion. But in spite of the critical spirit, religion is not passing away. The men of today are more deeply, more intensely religious than they were at any former period. “The day of the religious fraud, the religious humburg, is happily passing away. Its doom is sounded In all the books of the day, in all the public prints of the day, by all the lips of today. Venerable shams are passing, but true religion is not pass¬ ing. “The putting out of the fires that burn at this moment on Roman 'Catholic altars would be the greatest disaster that could overtake our coun¬ try,” said Dr. Fishburn. “Were any single Protestant body to be abolished there is some other body that might take its place; but there is no other body that could take the place of the oldest of the Christian churches.” LESSONS TAUGHT BY r CATHOLICS t Rev. Madison C. Peters Thinks Protestants Should Learn. On the subject, “What Protestants Should Learn from Catholics,” Rev. Madison C. Peters preached a forci¬ ble sermon last evening in the Broad street Baptist Church. He said, in part: “Catholics teach us the lesson of regular and constant attendance upon public worship. Protestants go when the weather is just to their liking. It Is high time that an umbrella was in¬ vented that would protect Protestants from the rain on Sunday. The Catho¬ lic puts his church first. Seek to em¬ ploy a Catholic, his first inquiry is whether there is a church near. Catholics go to church to worship. Protestants to hear an eloquent preacher. The devotional element in "too many of our churches is lost sight -of. Catholics seldom ever in their prosperity turn against their church. Would to God our rich Protestants were as faithful. “The rich Catholic hesitates not to kneel by the side of the poorest. Protestants have too keen a sense of smell. When the doors of our Protestant churches are not only open but the world outside feels that the rich and poor can meet together with¬ out invidious comparisons, the great masses now outside of the church will pour in like the tides of the sea. Tf there is one place this side of heaven where men ought to meet on a com¬ mon level it ought to be in the house of God in common brotherhood pros¬ trated in prayer before a common Father. “Protestants should learn from Catholics how to give. Catholics are churches. Behold the earnings they lay upon the altar of the church. “Every Catholic is identified with some parish. There are thousands of Protestants in this city whose church membership is in their trunks, or in the place where they used to live. They remind me of those matches that strike only on their box—when you have the match you haven't the box, and when you have the box you haven’t the match. “In caring for their children Catho¬ lics teach tis a lesson. The Protes¬ tant laity need to be awakened to a deep sense of the magnitude of their duty toward the children. Here is the source of strength in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has been charged with putting too much stress upon good works and not enough upon faith. Protestantism has swung to the other extreme and not put enough stress upon good works. Good works won’t save, but faith without works is dead. The Catholic charities, covering every conceivable case of need and suffer¬ ing, put Protestants to shame.” “Though poor in thanks we be, yet, we thank thee.” THE ATTITUDE OF CATHOLICS ON THE QUESTION OF EDUCATION PRAISED BY NON-CATHOLICS. Only a few days ago a writer sign¬ ing himself “Protestant” thus wrote in one of the New York daily papers: “The movement of the Roman Catho¬ lics to secure a system of education which shall not ignore religion is a movement in the right direction. And their self-sacrificing, efforts in main¬ taining their parochial schools for this purpose ought to cause Protestants to blush, when it is compared with their own indifference in the matter.” We IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION are not accusomed to be patted on the back by our Protestant fellow- countrymen. There is only one blot on the oth¬ erwise bright page of the Church bat¬ tle for religion in the classroom. It is the bad example given by some Catholics in sending their children to Protestant or infidel colleges. This is a scandal to the Catholic body at large, as well as to the children thus deprived of the religious teaching to which they have a right. Now, Christ has said some terrible things about the one who gives scandal. “Better that that man had never been born.” It is useless to urge in defence of such un-Catholic parents that the college is unsectarian. I hate the word. IJn- sectarianism is a sect, and one of the most dangerous. It is the sect of those who hold that God has no place in the claccroom, and it is far more important to enable the young men or women to rise in social station than to have them learn the truths of Christianity. This is paganism. “For after all these things do the heathen seek.” In the question of education there can be no unsectarianism. To listen to pro¬ fessors for four or five hours a day, lecturing on philosophy, history, etc., and to hear nothing of a real personal God and His rights over men and man’s duties toward Him, is a sectar¬ ian object lesson that will sink deeper into the hearts of the young than any other lesson learned within those un- sectarian college v/alls. Bourke B. Cochran, N. Y., in his Washington’s Birthday address at Philadelphia said: “If intellectual culture alone were sufficient, then Greece in her glory would still be with us, because in the achievements of architecture, literature, sculpture and very likely in music and painting, subjects that indicate the greatest de¬ velopment of the human mind, Greece surpassed everything the moderns have attempted. Yet Greece is a memory.” CHINESE MINISTER SPEAKS. Wu Ting Fang. Chinese Minister to the United States, said at Philadel¬ phia April 2, 19 02: “I have visited many of your col¬ leges and schools. My candid judg¬ ment compels me to say that there is something here that is lacking. “Unless that I am grievously mis¬ taken. your system of education is di¬ rected merely to mental training. In America you have in your educational system everything but moral training.” Ha, ha! And this from the heathen Chinese, Mr. Ditchburn!!! The Little Jap Speaks. “YOu teach too much arithmetics/* said a Japanese visitor to an American, school. “In Japan we teach our child¬ ren manners; then we teach them morals; after that we teach them arithmetic, for arithmetic without manners and morals makes men and women sordid.” Holy Scripture teaches: “It is a proverb: A young man according to his way; eve ,/hen he is old he will not depart from it.” Pagan philosophy no less than the Bible emphasizes this truth. Seneca says: “It is necessary to guide tender minds, but very difficult to root up vices which have grown up with us.’* Quintilian wrote: “The young must be trained and educated, for once evil has taken root one can easier break, than bend.” Webster. Daniel Webster in his famous speech* in the Girard case: “It is a mockery and an insult to common sense to maintain that a school for the instruc¬ tion of youth, from which Christian instruction by Christian teachers is- sedulously and religiously shut out, is- not deistic and infidel in its purpose and in its tendency.” President Roosevelt Said in an address ]>efore the Long Is’and Bible Society: “There is in the ZSnglish language no word more abased than that of education. The popular idea is that the educated man is one who has mastered the learning of the schools and the colleges. * * * It is a good thing to be clever, to be able and smart; but it is a better thing to have the qualities that find their expression in the Decalogue and the Golden Rule.” Lord Disraeli said: “A system of national education without religion will produce a national calamity more disastrous to the state than to the church.” The great Mr. Gladstone said: “Ev¬ ery system of education which leaves out religious instruction is a danger¬ ous system.” Washington. “Of all .he dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, re¬ ligion and morality are indispensable supports.” MOST REV. PATRICK JOHN KVAN, I). D. LL. I)., ON. THE SCHOOL QUESTION. Most ungracious would le the act on our part were we to cross land and' sea in search of “old things and new” with which to defend the cause >'*' AND THE DIGNITY OF HA BOH "God and Country,” and at. the same trine pass over the honored names of those whose lives have been spent in exhorting and encouraging, in upbuild¬ ing and defending, in public and in private, the glorious cause of Christ¬ ian education. I refer to our Most Rev. Archbishop. Patrick John Ryan, D. D. L.L. D.. and his Rt. Rev. Aux¬ iliary Bishop Edmund F. Prendergast, D. D. V. G., and in all their zeal “in season and out of season,” be it said to their glory, ‘‘giving offence to no man.” Nor may we pass over in si¬ lence the labor and zeal of our clergy and the devotion and sacrifice of our people, in erecting and supporting our schools, wherein “the greatest boon e’er given to man,” “the faith of our fathers,” may be propagated in the hearts of our children. Letter of Archbishop Ryan. Our Holy Father has, in his letter to the Bishops of the United States on the school question, renewed his con¬ firmation of the Decrees of the Coun¬ cil of Baltimore. All Catholic parents should send their children to Catholic schools, either parochial or collegiate, unless for good reasons permitted by ecclesiastical authority to do other¬ wise. The people of this diocese have made great sacrifices to build and equip and support their schools. We are proud of their zeal for the Christ¬ ian education of their little ones. The Chicago Educational Exhibit, from this and from other dioceses of the country, has clearly shown the equal¬ ity, if not superiority, of our paro¬ chial schools and colleges to rival in¬ stitutions. We thank God for the Brothers and Sisters of the various religious or¬ ders devoted to Christian education, who have proved that charity can ef¬ fect more than gold. Let us cheer them and second them in their noble work of preserving the rising genera¬ tion from the' twin evils of ignorance and vice: let the people show their ap¬ preciation of them, and their enlight¬ ened love of their own children, by sending those children to Catholic- schools. Your devoted servant in Christ. P. J. RYAN, Archbishop of Philadelphia. Now we would respectfully ask Mr. Ditchburn if he will publicly call the learned and religious gentlemen, whose names are attached to the fore¬ going statements, “Defamers of the public school and croaks and birds of ill-omen.” “Tell it net in Gath,” Mr. Ditchburn. Or will he say that their ’“Enmity” comes from an opposition of interference “with what they think to be to their interest or welfare”? “Alas! Poor Yorick!” Mr. Ditchburn has, knowingly or unknowingly, agreed with the fore¬ going authorities when he tells us that according to the law of the Great Jehovah, “Education of the child should begin with the first breath it draws.” But let him remember that Mr. Webster’s Iriternatonal Diction¬ ary tells us that “EDUCATION,” (a drawing forth) implies not so much the communication of knowledge as the discipline of the intellect and the regulation of the heart.” And in¬ struction. says Mr. vVebster, “is that part of education which furnishes the mind with knowledge.” Hence, all the foregoing authorities, men who represent the leading thought of our day, acknowledge that the youth of the land are being in¬ structed in our public schools, but are not being fully educated, because they are not being taught those principles which “draw forth” the heart and lead it up to God. And again when the Saviour would ask for the most sacred gift within the power of man to be¬ stow, He did not ask for intellect or wealth, but He said: “Son, give me thy heart.” In fine, when the Church-men and States-men speak as above quoted, they are not to be considered “ene¬ mies of the public schools,” nor are they “Croaks or birds of ill-omen,” but they say, “not only instruct the intellect in the sciences, but educate the youth of our land and then they will have in their heart a knowledge of the science of God, to whom all their moral actions should ultimately tend, and this drawing form of the heart can come only through religious instruction.” “It is time for us all,” says the “Lutheran World” of December 10, 1903, “in the midst of an irresolute generation, to be presuaded, and tc act upon the persuasion, that religion is not artistic delight in a divine idea, but a personal loyalty to a Divine Saviour, a condition in which we take from Him our law and our life and yield to Him the allegiance of our heart and our service.” To the writer it would appear thal. all the foregoing statements may be summed up into the answer which the Saviour gave to the Scribes and Pharisees and Herodians when they asked Him, “Was it lawful to pay tribute to Caesar or no?” and He said: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, '' and to God the things that are God’s.” We are constantly reminded by the Philadelphia “North American” that Governor Pennypacker considered “Matthew Stanley Quay a greater so IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION . statesman than Webster or Clay.” But we pause for someone to rise to inform us that the Professor from Ta- maqua is a greater authority on re¬ ligion and morality than Washington, Webster, Gladstone and Roosevelt- and all the divines and learned citi¬ zens who have spoken on the subject as above quoted. Don't all speak at once, please! 4—Mr. Ditchburrfs Prison Statistics Palpably Refuted “I was in prison and you did not visit me.” In this paper. Mr. Editor, we pro¬ pose, first, to disprove, on tne best possible authority, the assertion of Mr. Ditchburn, in regard to prison sta¬ tistics, and in our next paper to give a rapid review of parts of his article not yet referred to. But, let me first disclaim, with all the force that words can convey, any intention to prove by the following statistics that the public school is a breeder of criminals or a hotbed of vice. Crime was from the beginning, and will be until the end, and the Saviour has said unto us. ‘‘Needs be that scandals come.” Cain slew Abel in the beginning and Judas was a traitor and a suicide. But. Mr. Editor, a prominent, pub¬ lic and educated man may reasonably be held to an account, or asked to ex¬ plain Iris public and published utter¬ ances. Now, Mr. Ditchburn has said, in his published article of January 11, as found in “The Chronicle” and “Re¬ publican” of that date: “Make an ex^ animation of those who have sunk or are sinking into prison cells anc vou will find that 99 per cent, of them were never, or but little, under such influence as that of the public schools.” In accordance, then, with the invitation of Mr. Ditchburn, and as an act of Christian charity, we have visited “the spirits that are in prison” and present to Mr. Ditchburn and your readers the result of our in¬ vestigation. Prison Statistics for Mr. Ditchburn. In the course of over eleven months of 1903 there were admitted to the Schuylkill County Prison at Pottsville, Pa., 130 convicts, of whom, accord¬ ing to the prison records, 84 attended public schools, 4 attended private schools, and 42 attended no school or both public and private school. Now', as those who have attended no school, or both public or private schools, would not change the net re¬ sult when equally divided between public and private schools, we leave them out and we find the following re¬ sult: Percentage of convicts in Schuylkill County Prison, in 1903, who had at¬ tended public schools, .64 8-13. Percentage of convicts in Schuyl¬ kill County Prison in 19 03, who at¬ tended private schools, .03 1-13. Percentage of convicts in Schuylkill County Prison in 1903, who had at¬ tended both private and public or no school, 3 2 4-13. Philadelphia County Prison. And, again, Mr. Editor, the statis¬ tics from Philadelphia County Prison, show as follows: For six years preceding 1903, there- were received at the Philadelphia County Prison 2,895 convicts, of whom 2,170 registered as having attended public schools, and 133 as having at¬ tended private schools, and 3 88 as having attended no school, 204 as- having attended both schools. The percentage, then, for convicts in Philadelphia County Prison for six years preceding 1903 would be as fol¬ low's: From public schools, about .7 4 1-2.. From private schools, about .04 1-2.. From no schools, about .13 1-2. From both schools, about .07 1-2. Huntingdon Reformatory. The records of the Huntingdon Re¬ formatory for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania show that during 1903 there were committed to that institu¬ tion 361, of whom 312 attended pub¬ lic schools; 24 attended private schools, and 2 5 attended no school or both schools. Th<‘ r ercentage of those who at¬ tended public schools w T as .86 1-2. The percentage of those who at¬ tended private schools was .06 3-5. The percentage of those who at¬ tended both schools was .08 9-10. House of Refuge at Glen Mills, Del¬ aware County, Pa., for Boys Under 1(> Years. Committed during 1903, 359, of whom: 297 attended public schools, or .82 4-5 per cent. 4 3 attended private schools, or .12 per cent. 19 attended no schools, or .05 1-& per cent. AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 31 Eastern Penitentiary at Philadelphia. 488 admitted in the year 1902. 371 attended public schools, or .76 1-5 per cent. 14 attended private schools, or .02 4-5 per cent. 33 attended both schools; or .06 7-10 per cent. 70 attended no schools, or .14 3-10 per cent. Total, 488, or 100 per cent. “Of the 48 8 received, 69 had ac¬ quired trades by apprenticeship, 24 had acquired trades other than by ap¬ prenticeship, and 395 had no trades, and 288 were idle when arrested.” Again, Mr. Editor, I beg to assure you that for me to enter into the fore¬ going figures is no pleasing task, nor, as has been said, is it' for the purpose of proving or disproving anything for any school, public or private. But it is, * positively and most emphatically, to prove that when the Professor from Tamaqua made and published the statements above quoted, and in¬ vited examination thereof, he used extravagant language, and made an unwarranted statement that will not bear investigation or careful analysis. To establish this I am obliged to give the figures as found in the rec¬ ords of the institutions above named, and not a mere denial, as he made a mere assertion. Not “words, words!” Mr. Editor, but facts, facts, Mr. Ditchburn! When we consider how widely sepa¬ rated are the institutions from which the above statistics were received, we may at least hope that Mr. Ditchburn will not presume to say that the State officials who are at the head of those Institutions are, or could be, “under the influence of that half of the Christian Church” to whose members Mr. Ditchburn refers as “defamers of the public sphools.” Only quite recently the New York Sun proved a similar result with prison statistics received from other parts of the country. But, I imagine, that I hear some person in the “audience” to say, “You are taking this man too seriously.” In answer let me say, that I am not disproving the above statement from Mr. Ditchburn, as a man, but as the superintendent of public schools in Tamaqua. We all, and frequently, hear men make loud and extravagant assertions, but we do not take their words seriously. We consider who is the man, what have been his oppor¬ tunities, what is his education, what is his standing or position in society, what is his responsibility to society? All these conditions having been con¬ sidered, we take him seriously or otherwise. For example, during a. heated political campaign we hear or- read political harangues from repre¬ sentatives of both or all parties con¬ cerned, and often our conclusion is that the speaker “has been talking to the galleries,” or “making a bid for votes.” And, now, Mr. Editor, when we apply those principles to Mr. Ditchburn, will you, or the reader, say I have taken him too seriously? Whom have I taken too seriously? * Not one of those poor creatures, who- Mr. Ditchburn says is not a “moral” man because “he must work from early morn until far into the night for the meanest necessaries of life.”' Not a mere politician making a “stump speech” to the galleries, to catch “votes” for his party. But the above quotation was the extravagant language, the unwarrant¬ ed assertion of the Superintendent of public schools in Tamaqua, and he in¬ vited examination thereof! It is neither a disgrace to our coun¬ try nor a reflection on her institu¬ tions, nor is it discouraging to society, that among our citizens there should be found violators of the law and those who languish in a prison-cell. Wrong and wrong-doers have been from the beginning, and will be unto the end. We had rather say that men are convicts, not because of our public institutions but in spite of them! Mr. Editor, if a bishop of any of our great religious denominations were to say in print that 99 per cent. of those in prison were not members of his particular sect, we would be surprised and would not believe him. But a bishop of any of our religious denominations would be far more jutified in making such an assertion than was Professor Ditchburn. Be¬ cause only a part of the people be¬ long to any particular denomination, whereas nearly all the people have been educated in our public schools, and, consequently, Mr. Ditchburn would have been as fully justified in saying that 99 per cent, of the crimi¬ nals of our country are not Ameri¬ can citizens, as he was in saying that “9 9 per cent, of those who have sunk and are sinking into prison cells were never, or but little, under such • influences as that of the public schools.” All this, not to reflect on our public schools, but, Mr. Editor, the reflection, and a great one. is on Professor Ditchburn. unless he can give some better proof than his mere assertion. He owes it to the tax¬ payers and to his own reputation as a public official to do so. It has been said, and truly, “That undue flattery partakes the nature of detraction.” If this be so, and we 2 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION doubt it not, then we are justified in •saying that Mr. Ditchburn has so ■overstepped the bounds of reason¬ ableness in his extravagant lauda¬ tion of our public schools that he has rendered questionable his evi¬ dence, and, if it were possible, by his undue flattery, he has detracted from the honor due by him to his “alma mater,” the public schools. An Appeal to the “Bench and Bar.” To you the gentlemen of the “Bench and Bar,” versed in the legal code and dispensers of justice, let me say: If a witness were to give testi¬ mony in our courts in any case, civil or criminal, and you were convinced that his testimony would not bear cross-examination in regard to his¬ tory or statistics on account of his un¬ warranted assertions, would you not consider his evidence tainted, and would the Court instruct the jury to render a verdict of guilty on such evi¬ dence? Certainly not! And you, the Intelligent public, who are the jury in the case, would you render a ver¬ dict of guilty on such evidence? “Tell it not in Gath.” And, again, the evi¬ dence of such a witness having been shaken, or rendered questionable, in one particular, would you not all, judge and jury and attorney, look with grave suspicion on all the evi¬ dence he would give in the case being tried? Your silence gives consent! One Step Further. Now, gentlemen of the “Bench arid Bar,” you, Mr. Editor, and the jury, the reading public, hear my appeal: The superintendent of public schools at Tamaqua, R. F. Ditchburn, sallied forth from his retreat and accustomed retirement and appeared before “The Educational Association” of Schuylkill County on January 11, 1904, and be¬ fore that educated body of our hon¬ ored fellow-citizens he expounded a code of morals which, it is said, he bad been preparing for three months previous to the aforesaid January 11, 1904. I confess to all my hearers that, after reading his address several times, I am at a loss to determine just what he desired to prove. To my mind it is a case of “confusion worse •confounded.” But the following facts are clear to all and “he that runs may read them:” To one class of his fellow-citizens he says, by implication, 99 per cent, of you are in prison. To another class he says, if you are not in prison it is only because we have not prisons enough to hold you all. To a third class he says, “You are croaks and birds of ill-omen, and defamers of our public schools.” To a fourth class he says: You are not moral men because “you trudge from early morn till far into the night for the meanest neces¬ saries of life.” To a fifth class he says, “You are poor, but honest,” and that is very significant. Mr. Editor, is this analysis too searching? .Are not those his own words found in his article? Then you ask who are left? I suppose a sixth class, who will say to themselves: “We are holier than thou.” And, Mr. Edi¬ tor, when that is said, or implied, let every honest Christian man put the one hand on his heart and gasp for breath, and the other hand on his pocketbook, lest it quietly disappear! And, again, when such is come to pass, let all Christian lovers of their coun¬ try not only say, “Angels and ministers of grace defend us,” but say “Our Father, Who Art in Heaven,” defend our country and her institutions, not from her enemies, but from her so- called friends! Now' to the point: He invited us to “make an examination of those who have sunk or are sinking into prison cells,” and he assures us that we would find that 99 per cent, of them were never under the influence of public school “morality.” We have done as he requested and proved by State authority that Prof. Ditchburn was mistaken. Whether his error was a formal or a material one we say not. But his testimony in this particular and very important point is become tainted and until he disproves the foregoing figures by an authority superior to the records of the institutions from which the rec¬ ords were received, his testimony loses force in the matter under considera¬ tion. The Motives Which Prompted Such Language. In the prosecution of every criminal charge the motives which prompted the act play a most important part. It is duly in order for us to ask what motives could have prompted Mr. Ditchburn to make such criminal charges against so many of his fellow- citizens? We say criminal charges, but he did even more. He made con¬ victs of them without even giving them a trial. It is true “that ignorance of the law r excuses none.” But Mr. Ditchburn could not plead ignorance. He is an aged, an estimable and edu¬ cated man. We v'ould not permit our¬ selves to even think that bigotry or race prejudice caused him to belch forth such an assault on his unoffend¬ ing neighbors; yes, on men of his own town, who, by their taxes, earned in their sweat and blood, make of Mr. Ditchburn “a moral man.” Yet Mr. Ditchburn outraged their feelings when he said, “you trudge for a liv-» AND the DIGNITY of labor S3 Ins:;” at best you are ‘‘poor, but hon¬ est, and that is very significant.” Was he prompted to this defense of public schools by the progress of re¬ ligious schools in our county? There ■was no occasion for alarm on that -score. There are today in the public schools of Schuylkill county 38,836 children, and in the parochial schools of our county only 1,689. Hence there was no good cause why he should join ‘‘the coppersmiths of Ephesus in opposition to Paul and in defence of the temple of Diana.” To be more exact, the population of Schuylkill county is estimated at 173,- 000. The Catholic population is esti¬ mated at 6f>,000, and out of that 65,- 000 we have only 1,6 89 children in private or parish schools. This would prove to Mr. Ditc'nburn that there are nor. in our county so many ‘‘defamers of public schools, croaks and birds of ill-omen” as he would in his night¬ mare imagine. Again, if we add to the Catholic population of our county the Lutherans and Episcopalians, whose religious tenets approve of such schools, and who support them wher¬ ever possible, we shall have about 7 5,000 citizens in our county whose feelings have been outraged by the un¬ dignified, inaccurate and impolitic lecture of Professor Ditchburn. And this lecture received the ‘‘unanimous approval of the Educational Associa¬ tion of Schuylkill County.” But this much we do believe, that whatever may have been the real mo¬ tive for such utterances. scarcely ■could the Professor have devised a more eloquent appeal to all lovers of religion and morality, to examine into the necessity of Christian education for their children, than by the publica¬ tion of his lecture of January 11, 1904. That lecture is sufficient to cause all who have any regard for God and His law to say with Mr. Schaffer, Su¬ perintendent of Public Instruction in Ppnnsvlvanifl • “Wp will Tint nprmit Pennsylvania: ‘‘We will not permit anyone who is either irreligious or in- dLTerent to religion to teach our children in the public schools.” And, moreover, if the sentiments of Mr. Ditchburn are to prevail, then it be¬ comes our Christian duty to establish our own schools for the preservation of religion and morality in the hearts of our children, in our homes and in our country. And still further, Mr. Editor, and kind reader, you will agree with me that ‘‘an aged and estimable and ed¬ ucated man” must know that 1,689 will not bear a proportion of over 9 9 per cent, to 38,8 36; or, as the Profes¬ sor puts it, ‘‘99 per cent, of our crimi¬ nals were never in a public school.” But what were his motives? We hesitate to further prosecute this feat- of investigation lest we be- _ome gunty of inciting our feeling to a not °i words not pleasing “to ears ol flesh and blood.” But what shall we say of the mem- w^o ^ 1 . he ' of Becksville “Tim iif U rece ntly, in a sermon on ton -” aml c^acter of Washing¬ ton. As a Methodist and a Prot- estan of the Protestants I cannot pem nnL- opportunity to pass without uttering- an indignant protest against f'» a ‘ empts , “> violate P the con*sM?u- on b> wanton and infernal attempts CathoHo S ?en he '°^ lty ot ° U1 ' Ro 'An Latholic fellow citizens. Only a few jears ago the Methodists were de¬ famed m like manner.” M e would not even insinuate that the words of Rev. Pepper are appli¬ cation^ ° U \ fe,I ?w citizens of the Edu- CV, m. Association of Schuylkill • V because we admire them in' ::;L PriVate lives - we greet them 1 public, we would defend them and reasona ble circumstance and we give into their charge to be moulded and developed. he most precious gems that God has given to man. 38,836 of our innocent little Children. But, may we not expect those gentlemen of the classroom to mould, the minds and hearts of the • la °jM n 5 0,1 ! Jnes different from those laid down by Mr. Ditchburn? And may not the parents of those children “norr the fa-e gentlemen S 75 ana r app,au ^ one who calls i )1 . 11 our citizens “croaks and ^Nomen.” and says to thou- ® a * ds . of . theai by implication, if you if we ha PnS ° n yoU would be there £ ad f™sons enough to hold you. lell it not in Gath.” which, being in¬ terpreted, might mean, “Do me^ no harm, good man.” Verdict. >3Ut J f ; Mr ‘ Pitchburn’s testimony in egard to prison statistics is proved to be tainted and questionable, shall Tcf ® r can p ve acp ept his code of morals as coirect and unquestionable? Can vc as Christians accept without fur¬ ther consideration from a ouestionable Mltness a doctrine of morality from which the foundation of morality, God aua b ps law, are excluded? Certainly Conclusion. If Mr. Ditchburn had made his quoted remarks in the giow of an after-dinner speech, or in “a few ex¬ tempore remarks” to a few friends “to the manner born,” who would applaud and forget, certainly no one would IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION 3 4 take him seriously. But when he has time to write and correct, revise and examine, consult his authorities and weigh every word, and he the Superin¬ tendent of public schools at Tamaqua. we must take him seriously, and we do. A Serious Matter. It certainly is, and all honest men will acknowledge it is a serious mat¬ ter for a public man, a leader of youth, an expounder of morality, to commit himself to such extravagant language and to place himself in a compromising position. Every pupil in a school, public or private, looks up to Iiis teacher as a superior who says nothing that he cannot prove. And if the teacher or principal is guilty of extravagant language the pupil wnl resort to the same and lose respect for the superior. In my heart I have too much re¬ spect for our public schools to think they are in need of the extravagant words Professor Ditchburn has writ¬ ten for them. And, again. Mr. Editor, I have too much respect for the Christian, churcli-going, God-fearing people of Tamaqua and Schuylkill County to- even imagine that they will nail their Christian convictions to the mast with Mr. Ditchburn’s doctrine of morality, which is without the Saviour and God’s law. The writer of these papers has no pretention, nor would he presume to say, that they are perfect. The searching eye of the critic may unve a “coach and four” through the lines, if he so chooses. But I do assert pos¬ itively that I have given the best pos¬ sible authority for every important as¬ sertion, and were it not for the time it required to obtain such authority, Mr. Ditchburn might have been answered readily and in a few days after the publication of his article. 5—A General Review “My country, ’tis of thee, sweet land of Liberty, of thee I sing.” Mr. Editor, I hope you will not im¬ agine that I so far ignore Mr. Ditch- burn’s views on morality as to say that there is no such morality as he speaks of. There is, indeed, such morality; but it is in the wider and broader sense and meaning of the term. Hence, all those whom I have quot¬ ed, from Washington to Roosevelt, in speaking of Christian morality, invar¬ iably say, either directly or indirectly, “religion and morality.” Those were sacred words of Wash¬ ington: “Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national mor¬ ality can prevail in exclusion of relig¬ ious principles.” Therefore, when Mr. Ditchburn says, “life and all that goes to make life,” and “thou shalt not kill,” are at the bottom of morality, he takes the term in its broadest sense and meaning, as did the Pagans, but not in the sense in which it is accepted by Christians who are guided by the Decalogue and the Sermon on the Mount. But why not inform his anxious readers on what authority he gives this command? Or, if He who gave this command, “Thou shalt not kill.” pave any other command, why not tell his readers why man is obliged to obey these Commandments? By so doing he would lead his hearers from a natural to a supernatural morality; from an ethical culture to a revealed religion up to God. Herbert Spencer says in his “Facts and Comments”: “The Agnostic who thinks he can provide forthwith ade¬ quate guidance by setting forth a natural code of right conduct duly il¬ lustrated is under an illusion.” “Thou shalt not kill,” then, is only a natural law, because it is stamped io the heart of every man, no matter how illiterate. Those fundamental principles of so- ciely were given to man with and to make his human nature. But the Giver of that natural law did not leave man, the noblest of His creatures, to work out his ultimate end by the natural law only. He gave him also a revealed law, and from the beginning He sent those who were to expound that divine law, and did not leave man to grope in the dark, and be moral only according to his “environ¬ ments, age or sex.” St. Paul tells us that, “he who has sinned without the law will be judged without the law, but he who has sinrn*'! with the law will be judged by’ the law.” What did he mean? He meant that those who had sinned be¬ fore the promulgation of the revealed law would be judged by the law of nature stamped in their conscience, and those who had offended under the revealed law would be judged by ihe reveaWi law. AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 3 $ Moreover, Mr. Editor, all thought¬ ful Christian men will readily under¬ stand how deficient must be a moral code which has for its foundation only that part of the natural law which says, “Thou shalt not kill,’’ and makes no reference to the life and teachings of the Saviour and Redeemer, who came to give us the new and more per¬ fect law, the law of love, which com¬ bines the law of Mount Sinai with the Sermon on the Mount, and becomes at once the only guide to true morality for Christian men. St. Paul tells us that in the Old Dis¬ pensation God spoke to the Fathers by the Prophets, but in the New Dis¬ pensation He spoke to us by His Be¬ loved Son. instructing us to renounce all ungodliness and to “live soberly, justly and piously.’’ Mr. Ditchburn says: “Neither shalt thou diminish the pleasure of living.” This is truly a broad assertion flowing from his broad “morality.” The Pagans of An¬ cient Greece and Rome never said more. They said, “we live to eat;” but Christian morality says, “we eat to live.” The happiness and pleasure of life are all very good when in accordance with right reason. But the Saviour has told us, “He that lives according to the flesh shall die;” and in a broad sense, what is that but the pleasures of life to excess? And Mr. Ditchburn uses neither restriction nor qualifica¬ tion. “Life and the love of life,” says the Professor, “and *the pursuit of happi¬ ness are the foundation of the Dec¬ alogue and every true system of morals.” The pursuit of happiness is only a natural morality, but the Decalogue is the foundation of true morality, be¬ cause it leads man to a life super¬ natural. Hence the Saviour said: “He that saves his life shall lose it, and he that loses his li'fe shall save it.” Is “Poverty a Standing Menace To All Goodness?” The Professor tells us that “mor¬ ality is never high where people have to struggle from early morn till far Into the night for the meanest neces¬ saries of life.” We acknowledge that such people may be embarrassed and must deny themselves many comforts, but we deny that it follows that they are not good moral men as a rule in the sense of Christian morality. Let us take the working man of Tamaqua! They are either employed in the mines or on the railroad. The miner leaves his home early, and certainly “trudges” all day in the bowels of the earth, and not for a very handsome salary. The man employed on the railroad turns his face to the north' 1 or to the south, and is absent, “trudg¬ ing” in snow and storm for two and 1 three days at a time. His fare, lik® the miner’s, when at work, is the com¬ monest and the coldest, if not just “the meanest.” Their manner may be uncouth and their language not re¬ fined, but to say they are not moral men would be to offer an insult to the bone and sinew of our nation. A 3 a rule, they pay their honest debts; they endeavor to acquire a respectable home for their family; they educate their children; they go to church when time permits; they are the fathers of the large families of our nation; they pay more taxes, in proportion to their possessions, than the man of wealth who enjoys all the “moral comforts”; of which Mr. Ditchburn speaks, and in time of war they fight the country’s battle and gain her glorious victories. Poets have sung their praises and kings have called them “the salt of the: earth,” “nature’s noblemen,” and we all call them “the horny-handed sons of toil.” But it has remained for Professor Ditchburn to say that “morality is never high where people struggle from early morn till far into the night for the meanest necessaries of life.” Truly would such Christian moral¬ ity, without religion, be much like unto “The play of Hamlet with Hamlet left out.” Practical Examples. Washington and his band of pa¬ triots left their bloodstained footprints in the snow at Valley Forge when they “trudged” for their country’^ freedom. They lived on “hardtack,”' "slept on their guns,” and had a price put on their heads as traitors. But,, were they moral men? Lincoln was a rail-splitter, common enough, in-; deed. Garfield, our martyred Presi¬ dent, drove muies on the towpath. More slavish work he could r\ot find. Our “reigning” President Roosevelt was a rough rider. But, according to Mr. Ditcliburn’s morality, all these; heroes, martyrs and statesmen were not moral men. .Mr. Goldsmith Said: “Ill fares the land, to hastening ill a prey, Where wealth accumulates and (poor, but honest) men decay.” The Holy Bible Says: “He that will not work, neither let him eat,” and, “Thou shalt earn thy bread in the sweat of thy brow.” Mr. Ditchburn Says: “Morality is never hfg*A where men trudge from early morn till far int thers as themselves. Itev. Francis P. Donnelly, S. J., at Wyoming, I*a., on “Religion and Mor¬ ality,” says: For what, my dear friends, is re¬ ligion and what is morality? Re¬ ligion is the summing up of our re¬ lations with God. Religion is a com¬ plete statement of how we stand to¬ wards God. That statement has two chapters, the chapter of truths about God and man, the chapter about du¬ ties between man and God and man and man; the first chapter contains what we must believe; the second chapter Avhat we must do; the first chapter is the chapter of dogma; the second the chapter of virtue. Re¬ ligion, then, in its widest sense com¬ prehends morality or good living. Morality is practical religion * * Religion gives the foundation to morality; it gives an adequate sanc¬ tion to morality; it gives the motive power to morality. Morality without religion is an engine without steam; it is flesh and blood without the flush and force of life. It is a pulseless, nerveless, sinewless, muscleless, back¬ boneless sort of a creature. Religion is the throbbing heart, the life-blood, the vivifying soul, the stirring energy of the moral life. Take away religion and you take away the example of Christ, and the good example of Christ has been the . dynamic force that has electrified the saints and Christian heroes and noblest men and women the world has ever known. The short martyrdom, of the fire, the sword or the wild animal, the long martyrdom of a life of purity, justice and charity have been made possible because Christ has lived and the mar¬ tyrs have learned to love Him. Take away Christ’s missionary spirit and Mother Katherine Drexel would be spending her millions in fashion and folly at Newport rather than in the educating and uplifting of the In¬ dians and Negroes. Take away Christ’s pity for the suffering and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s daughter, delicately reared in refinement and culture, would not today in New York city be giving for life t lie work of her hands and the devotion of her heart to those who are afflicted with iueur- abel cancers. Take away Christ’s love of souls, erase Calvary from the his¬ tory of the world, and Father Damien would never have borne to his agony and crucifixion among the lepers of Molokai, but would have lived and died contendedly as a small farmer on the fields of Belgium. What would the f>oor and suffering do with¬ out hope and patience? What would the rich do without gratitude to God and the realization of the obligation of wealth ? * * * AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 8—Something Better 53 If the reader has had the patience to wade through the incoherent thoughts, the undignified expressions and illogical conclusions of one who is a superintendent of public schools at Tamaqua and is honored by his fellow superintendents of Schuylkill county with tire position of President of their Educational Association, we now ask him, by way of contrast, to partake of the following feast pre¬ pared for him by no less personages than the philosophers, statesmen and historians, William E. Gladstone and Lord Macauley: Gladstone on Catholicity. Mr. Gladstone paid the following high tribute to the Catholic Church: “She has marched for 1,500 years at the head of civilization and has har¬ nessed to her chariot, as the horses of a triumphal car, the chief intellectual and material forces of the world. Her art is the art of the world; her great¬ ness, glory, grandeur, and majesty have been almost, though not abso¬ lutely, all that in these respects the world has had to boast of. Her children are more numerous than all {he members of the sects combined, and she is every day enlarging the boundaries of her vast empire. Her altars are raised in every clime,, and her missionaries are to be found wher¬ ever there are men to be taught the evangel of immortality and souls are to be saved. And this wondrous Church, which is as old as Christian¬ ity and as universal as mankind, is to-day, after twenty centuries of age, as fresh and vigorous and as fruitful as on the day when the Pentecostal fires were showered upon the earth. Surely such an institution challenges the attention and demands and de¬ serves the most serious examination of those outside its pale.” Lord Macauley (Protestant) on the Catholic Church. Extract from the Protestant Histor¬ ian, Lord Macauley’s Essay on the Pope: “There is not, and there never was, on this earth a work of human policy so well deserving of examination as the Roman Catholic Church. The his¬ tory of that Church joins together the two great ages of human civilization. No other institution is left standing (which carries the mind back to the times -when the smoke of sacrifice rose from the Pantheon, and when c&meteopards and tigers abounded in the Flavian amphitheatre. The proud¬ est royal houses are but of yesterday when compared with the line of Su¬ preme Pontiffs. That line we trace back in an unbroken series from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extends till it is lost in the twilight of fable. The Republic of Venice came next in antiquity. But the Republic of Venice was modern when compared to the Papacy; and the Republic of Venice is gone, and the Papacy remains. The Papacy re¬ mains, not in decay, not a mere an¬ tique, but full of life and youthful vigor. “The Catholic Church is still send¬ ing forth to the farthest end of the world missionaries as zealous as those who landed in Kent with Augustine, and still confronting hostile king® with the same spirit with which she confronted Attila. The number of her children is greater than in any former age. “Her acquisitions in the New World have more than compensated for what she has lost in the Old. Her spiritual ascendancy extends over the vast countries which lie between the plain® of the Missouri and Cape Horn—coun¬ tries which, a century hence, may not improbably contain a population as large as that which now inhabits- Europe. The members of her com¬ munion are certainly not fewer than a hundred and fifty millions; and it will be difficult to show that all other Christian sects united amounted to a hundred and twenty millions. Nor do we see any sign which indicates that the end of her long dominion is ap¬ proaching. She saw the commence¬ ment of all the governments and of all the ecclesiastical establishments that now exist in the world; and w© feel no assurance that she is not des¬ tined to see the end of them all. She* was great and respected before the Saxon had set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when; Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were still wor¬ shipped in the temple of Mecca. And she may still exist in undiminished vigor when some traveler from New Zealand shall,, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul’s.” Again he writes: “Four times since the authority of the Church of Rome was established 52 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION on Western Christendom has the hu* man intellect risen up against her yoke. Twice that Church remained completely victorious. Twice she came forth from the conflict bearing the marks of cruel wounds, bul with the principle of life still strong within her. When we reflect on the tre¬ mendous assaults she has survived, we find it difficult to conceive in what way she is to perish.” Front the Ave Maria, May 28th. 190 1. “Are Catholics wrong in supporting parish schools at great expense?” asks the editor of the New England Journal. And he answers: ‘‘Not if a man* be worth more than a dog.” The whole passage is so striking that we feel obliged to quote it in full: ‘‘But there is one Church which makes religion an essential in educa¬ tion, and that is the Catholic Church, in which the mothers teach their faith to the infants at the breast in their lullaby songs, and whose brotherhoods and priests, sisterhoods and nuns, im¬ print their religion on souls as indel¬ ibly aa the dfamond marks the hard¬ ened glass. They ingrain their faith in human hearts when most plastic to the touch. Are they wrong, are they stupid, are they ignorant, that they found parochial schools, convents, colleges, in which religion is taught? Not if a man be worth more than a dog, or the human soul, with eternity for duration, is of more value than the span of animal existence for a day. If they are right and we are wrong; if our Puritan fathers were wise, then we are foolish. Looking upon it as a mere speculative question, with their policy they will increase; with ours, we will decrease. Macaulay predict¬ ed the endurance of the Catholic Church till the civilized Australian should sketch the ruins of London from a broken arch of London bridge. We are no prophet, but it does seem to us that Catholics, retaining their religious teaching and we our heath¬ en schools, will gaze upon cathedral crosses all over New England when our meeting houses will be turned in¬ to barns. Let them go on teaching their religion to the children and let us go on educating our children in schools without a recognition of God and without the reading of the Bible, and they -will plant corn and train grapevines on the unknown graves of Plymouth Pilgrims and of the Puri¬ tans of Massachusetts Bay, and none will dispute their right of possession. We say this without expressing our own hopes or fears, but as inevitable from the fact that whatsoever a man soweth tbit shall he also reap.” AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR PROTESTANTS AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. From Sacred Heart Review, June 4th, 1904. We find the Rev. John C. Kilgo, D. D., of the Methodist Episcopal Church,, South, reported as saying re¬ cently: ‘‘The school question is a far-reach¬ ing issue, involving the ideals and tyx>e of American civilization. if these schools continue to secularlize the ideals sympathies and purposes of childhood and youth, the pros¬ pects are gloomy enough. The found¬ ers of this republic never dreamed that the idea of the separation of Church and State meant any sort of civil allegiance with infidelity or non- . religious classes. The separation of Church and State was never designed to be bitter antagonism between Church and State, and to yield the point is to surrender the nation into the hands of those classes who are least fitted to have it in their charge. The churches should lose,'no time in turning back the tide of secularism which has already grown to alarming proportions.” Methodist Praise for Catholics. A motion to censure the school policy of the Roman Catholic Church in this country was resisted by a good majority of the Methodist General Conference, which continued its ses¬ sions at Los Angeles during the past week. The motion was made by the Rev. J. R. King. secretary of the Church Extension Society of Phila¬ delphia. Chief Justice Lore, of Dela¬ ware, won hearty applause, however, by asserting that the Catholic Church had taken hold of a class of people ‘‘that no other form of religion could have moulded so well for the well¬ being of our common land.” He would support every evangelizing agency that helps to uplift man. The resolution was tabled. The Future Belongs to the Church— (Catholic.) From Sacred Heart Review, June 4th, 1904. ‘‘The burden of organizing and sup¬ porting a first-rate parish school is one,” says the Ave Maria, ‘that often weighs heavily on both pastor and people; but is is a necessary burden. The future belongs to the Church by many titles, but by none more un¬ mistakably than because she is form¬ ing the men and women of the future to religion by systematic instruction and practice from infancy. Every Catholic school today means a dozen flourishing parishes thirty years from today.” I IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 5.5. GLORIOUS PAGE IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH Grand Exhibit of Devotion to the Cause of Religious Ed neat ion by the Catholics of the United States. Rev. Charles Coppens, S. J., in the New Voice. Catholics have every reason to con¬ gratulate themselves on the good work they have done in behalf of re¬ ligious education. There is scarcely in history a grander exhibit of devo¬ tion to this noble cause than the sys¬ tem of parochial schools, colleges and universities built up and supported by Catholic effort and money, unaided by government support, all over the United States. There is nothing like this achievement either here or any¬ where else. And if it be remembered that within the last fifty or sixty years < latholics have had to provide, and have provided, the finest church build¬ ings ni the land, the most substantial land most elegant, both in large cities and in ten thousand smaller towns; if it be remembered that meanwhile they have enabled the Bishops to give a more thorough education to their clergy than is done by other denomi¬ nations; if it be remembered that all ■this has been accomplished by the wil¬ ling contributions of the faithful, rich and poor, working on generously and '.steadily in the rivalry of mutual good •will; if it be remembered, too, that all this time they had been handicapped by the tax imposed on them for the building and supporting of the secu¬ lar system of schools to which they cannot in conscience send their own children, they fieel convinced that the pages recording these results will be among the most glorious read in the history of the Church. As a consequence. Catholics are reaping consoling fruits from all these labors and sacrifices. The condition of the Church in this land, whether as regards its material improvements, its mental eminence, its moral in¬ fluence, the multitude of its societies, the commanding excellence of its clergy, the affection and devotedness of its laity, is a source of deep conso¬ lation, a thing of beauty in the sight of angels and of men. If others will, not co-operate with them in promoting religious educa¬ tion, then let them steadily look the fact in the face that religion is losing its hold on the country; after awhile there will be no Christianity in the United States but that of the Catholic Church. CATHOLIC S ATTACKED IN M. E. CONFERENCE Dr. King, of Philadelphia, Vigorously Criticises Vicar General Harnett— Justice Lore Replies. Los Angeles, May 9.—A Philadel¬ phia clergyman, the Rev. Dr. J. M. King, secretary of the Board of Church Extension, created a sensation as soon as the devotional services ended this morning in the Methodist Episcopal General Conference. Dr. King began by reading from a, letter written by the Rev. Peter Har¬ nett, vicar general of the Roman Catholic diocese of Monterey and Los Angeles, to a local newspaper yester¬ day, and based upon an utterance of the Episcopal address read before the conference by Bishop Foss last Thursday. In this letter Father Harnett took exception to the statement in the ad¬ dress that the Roman Catholic Church is opposed to the public school system of America. Dr. King Attacks Catholic Church. Dr. King made a spirited attack on Vie Roman Catholic Church and de¬ clared that the assertions of Father Harnett were contradicted by the* facts in the case. % He elaborated to some extent upon the statement that the Catholic Church did not interfere in politics, and concluded by reading a resolution embodying his views upon the subject, which he desired the conference to- adopt. When Dr. King finished reading his resolution there was a commotion among the delegates and a hum of conversation and cries of “No, no." A score of delegates were on their feet in an instant clamoring for rec¬ ognition from Bishop Fowler, who was presiding. Chief Justice Lore Deplores Attack. Chief Justice Charles B. Lore, of the Delav r are State Supreme Court, a lay delegate, made a strong speech in opposition to Dr. King’s stand. “In regard to Dr. King’s state¬ ment upon the Roman Catholic oppo¬ sition to the public school system in America,’’ said Justice Lore, “I am with him, but I believe this is no place nor time to indulge in an attack on the Roman Catholic Church or any other church. “I believe that the Roman Catholic Church is doing a great work in this country along certain lines, and we should put our hands under it and assist it or any other church in a.. work of evangelization.’’ 54 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR TO UNIVERSITY GRADUATES. Yonkers Home Journal and News, June 25, 1904. Rev. Alexander P. Doyle, C. S. P., of the Apostolic Mission House, Wash¬ ington, delivered the address to the graduates at the Catholic University of America. He said of the Univer¬ sity and its mission: “It might have been formed on the model of the hundred other universi¬ ties that flourish in this country in which the scientific method is the be- all and the end-all of the training. It would then have possessed no char¬ acter or individuality of its own. I do not mean in any sense to depre¬ cate the value of the scientific meth¬ od as such, but if the natural order and observation alone are made the sole sources of knowledge, as is done in secular universities, we are of a necessity obliged to throw out of court a large percentage of religious truth that moulds our lives far more inti¬ mately and effectually than do the or¬ dinary facts whose existence we may demonstrate by unaided natural rea¬ son. What would; become of such great truths as the.,; immortality of man’s soul, of the Incarnation of the Christ¬ man, of the existence of original sin, of the virgin birth "of Christ, the ex¬ istence of‘ miracles, and a thousand find- one great religious truths that in nowise can be brought under the scrutiny of the microscopes or be di¬ vided into cells and tissues by the scalpel? “Little wonder that these numerous secular universities are turning out a race of infidels who live for this world, and, in dying, go into oblivion. Little wonder that the great fact of religion and all that it stands for are being- washed out of our American life. Lit¬ tle wonder that the ideals of living are rapidly changing, and that exter¬ nal respectability is thought more of than internal goodness of heart: that personal comfort and convenience are to be attained even if the external laws of God go down in the struggle; that the Gospel of clean linen is far better than that of a clean heart; that the prevailing- and accepted maxims are get rich honestly, but get rich; the most useful political factor is the man who is shrewd enough not to get caught with the goods on him. “The practical recognition of a God who does shape our ends and who does enter into the daily affairs of our lives; who is not merely a mem¬ ory or even a moving presence, but is more an ever-living and ever-ooerat- ive force in our lives, gives a reality to the other side of the tapestry that is hidden from our earthly eyes; and what though the seamy side is turned towards us and we do see what we- consider evidences of unskillful han¬ diwork, still, we know that the Artist of supreme wisdom who has at His command infinite power, will bring all things out right in the end. The whole system of education, from the kinder¬ garten up through the common school into the college and the university, the system that has the approbation and commendation of the American people, has ‘no God in its knowledge,’ and herein lies the appalling danger and catastrophe that we are facing as a people. “Our great national peril is not di¬ vorce, blighting as it is. It is not intemperance, degrading as it is; not the desecration of the Sunday, cor¬ rupting as it is; it is not dishonesty in high places, damaging as it is; it is not the prostitution of high ideals of chastity, withering as it is; but it is because they would have no God in their knowledge, and therefore, as the Apostle of the Gentiles prophesies, they are given up to a reprobate sense. All the brood of civic and national evils flow from this chief one as a fountain head. “A great institution that will be placed on high in the capital of the nation as a city set on the mountain side in the full glare of the noonday sun, whose presence will fill every eye and which the nation cannot ignore, and whose existence it cannot erase, is necessary as a national pro¬ test against the banishment of God from the nation's life. In spirit it must not be just one more university. It must stand with an individuality all its own for religion. Let the sci¬ entific method be used to the very ut¬ most in its training, as an illustrious predecessor in the Catholic universi¬ ty of the Middle Age used the Aristo¬ telian method with such marvelous skill against the infidels of his day; and with such completeness, too, that it has ever since reformed both the terms and ideas, not only of philos¬ ophy but of scientific theology; but into it must be injected the truth of faith and revelation. The Catholic University must continue to give re¬ ligion its honored place in its curric¬ ulum of studies. It must be the most earnest supporter of the supernatural in our lives. It must be written all over with the cross of the Crucified One. It must be the defender of the hidden verities and the unseen influ¬ ences in our lives that do so much to mould and fashion us not only in¬ dividually but as a nation. “The Catholic University has not been started one hour too soon to do this work, nor are the vast sums of money invested here one cent too p-’uch to secure these results. This is our contribution to good citizenship* IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR 5 5 find while it is somewhat the measure ■of our ability it is not by any means the measure of our desire and solici¬ tude for the welfare of our country. The men who go forth from these classic halls must be, therefore, men of faith in the strictest sense of the word. University life and training should make you men of the pro- foundest faith, for you have a mission as leaders of the people that is grounded on nothing else but a vivid faith in Christ, and through this same faith it acquires a virility to withstand defeat and disappointment, to rise above disaster, and to persist in a sweet and wholesome optimistic spirit to the end that brings with it victory." CULT IRK NOT SUFFICIENT. From the Methodist Christian Advo¬ cate. Culture is good, but we must not hope to find in it that which it cannot .give. A recent writer tells of the de¬ cay of churches in certain rural dis¬ tricts, but does not seem to regret very much the fact. He says moral¬ ity shows no sign of decay in those re¬ gions, because the public schools still flourish. His hope for those commu¬ nities appears to be not in religion, but in culture. But culture will not save a soul. Communities have de¬ cayed in morals and life while culture flourished among them. But no com¬ munity ever decayed while the Christ¬ ian religion flourished in the midst. True Christians are the salt of the earth. It is the grace of God in the heart, and not knowledge in the head, that saves. ENTERS A PLEA FOR C A T H OLIC SC I IOOLS. Priest Calls for Financial Recognition By State. From Phila. Public Ledger, June 30, 1904. Rev. Philip R. McDevitt made a plea for “financial recognition’’ of Catholic parish schools by the State yesterday morning at the closing ses¬ sion of the State Convention of Cath¬ olic Societies, in St. James’ Hall, Thirty-eighth and Market streets. His remarks aroused enthusiastic ap¬ plause. “In seeking some financial recog¬ nition for their schools,” said the superintendent of parish schools in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, ■“Catholics are but asking that their own money, not other people's, shall be applied to the education of the children of the nation. “Who shall say that they ask more than their right? The State is not the absolute master of all moneys in its treasury. It is the custodian only, and justice requires that the moneys raised by general taxation be distrib¬ uted according to the reasonable and just wishes of the taxpayers. Our opposition to the existing st»ate of af¬ fairs proceeds from no sinister, sel¬ fish purpose. Sees Prejudice and Partisanship. “The history of the agitation con¬ cerning denominational schools can¬ not but make Catholics think that partisan feeling and religious preju¬ dices, and not the merits of the ques¬ tion, have brought about the present state of public opinion, the unwilling¬ ness to look calmly and justly on the claims of the Catholic minority. It is a notorious fact that the so-called ‘non-sectarian’ character was given to our State system of education only when Catholics asked, in justice, for such consideration as was accorded to the Protestant sects. “The common objection to the ap¬ propriation of any money from the public treasury to denominational schools is that such an act would be a violation of the fundamental law of the land, which recognizes no re¬ ligion or sect. The government’s ba¬ sis is broad, ignoring party and creed. Does it ever occur to those who in¬ sist on this view that the very policy of excluding religious instruction from schools maintained by a general taxation is a de facto class legislation in favor of unbelievers and agnostics, and utterly opposed to the principles of Christian denominations? Unbe¬ lief is actually some kind of belief. Consequently, may not the mass of Christians justly protest against a system which permits any State in¬ stitutions becoming tacitly an agency for the spread of infidelity? Difficulties Should Not He a Bar. “It is said that the official machin¬ ery required to carry out a system all these countries denominational schools would be so complicated as to be practically impossible because of the multitude of sects in the country which would claim recognition. Any agency which will meet the require¬ ments of the State in the amount and character of the education demanded ought to receive recognition. The difficulties incidental to such recog¬ nition should not rule out of court any just claim. “All that is asked is simply the recognition pf results secured in good educational work. It is a good policy, affirmed over and over again in mu¬ nicipal administration, to utilize ex¬ isting agencies. A hospital, though it be under denominational control. -5 6 IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR Las facilities to treat accidents. The -city authorizes it to run a public am¬ bulance and pays for the public ser¬ vice it renders. Why not apply the same principle in matters of educa¬ tion? It makes no difference to a municipality what particular form of religion is taught as long as good citi¬ zenship is cultivated: and if a corpo¬ ration of men will give as good an education, when tested by examina¬ tion, as the common school, why not compensate them for the work done? They Arc Recognized Abroad. “There is no argument against the system. What is done in England, Germany and Canada should not be impossible in the United States. In all these countries denominational schools are recognized. No unanswer¬ able argument has ever been adduced which destroys the justice of the Catholic claim in the matter of edu¬ cation. There is a just solution of the difficulty. Catholics are not clamoring for what is unjust or un¬ reasonable. The Catholic school sys¬ tem cannot be ignored by the State; it is a fact, a mighty fact. The Catholic Church is contending for a principle from which she can never recede. “The Catholic school has come to stay. There are men in the non- Catholic. educational world who would regret little if it were wiped out of existence. They have scant re¬ spect for private effort in education. Their belief is that the State should he the only educational agency, but, thank God, the free, untrammeled and unfettered Catholics of America are not under the domination of an atheistic oligarchy, as are the Catho¬ lics of France, and the day is far off ■when the State will dare legislate out of existence the Catholic school sys¬ tem. “With the unauestionable fact be¬ fore it of a. great religious organiza¬ tion educating today more than 1.- 000,000 children by a system of edu¬ cation that is keeping pace with every phase of the marvelous development of the country, it behooves the states¬ men of the land to consider what is the right and just attitude to assume toward the Catholic school system. By judicious encouragement, by help¬ ful sympathy, by financial aid and proper supervision of private schools, the State can accomplish all that is achieved by its assuming complete control of education; yet by this mode -of procedure it would avoid interfer¬ ing with the parental rights and con¬ scientious belief of its citizens. Cliurcli Will Not Change. “Whether recognition come or not, the Catholic Church will continue her mission of educating the children of the rapidly growing population. If the State be sincere in the declaration that it looks to the welfare of the whole people, Catholic education will yet receive proper consideration. May the day soon dawn when America and Americans will clearly se*e what the Catholic Church has done in her par¬ ish schools for the family and the State by jealously guarding the moral, religious and intellectual welfare of the child, and when all will recognize the necessity and permanence of the Catholic parish school. “The city of Philadelphia is sup¬ posed to afford to every child a free education at the city’s expense. Every child has the same constitutional right to this free education. In this re¬ spect all are equal before the lawq without regard to color, creed or na¬ tionality. The enrollment in the pub¬ lic schools of Philadelphia is 161.066. The school expenses of Philadelphia, according to the latest report (Public Ledger, June 20, 1904,) were $4,722.- 500.85. 40.000 in Parish Schools. “At this moment there are 40,000 children in the parish schools of Phil¬ adelphia. The parents of these chil¬ dren, while paying the taxes which all citizens must pay, and thereby sup¬ port the public schools, are at the same time educating at their own ex¬ pense 40,000 children. What does this mean? A short while ago I obtained from a few' pastors the estimated cost of certain parish school buildings. The aggregate cost of ten Catholic parish school buildings was $501,200. The number of children attending these schools was 7,368. There are sixty-two parish school buildings in Philadelphia, with an enrollment of almost 40.000. . Now, if it cast. th< city of Philadelphia almost $5,000,000 to educate 161,066 children, what would it cost to educate 40,000 more, and to erect buildings to give them accommodations? Yet these 40,000 have the same right to a free educa¬ tion as the 160,000 in the public schools. With these facts in mind, we can rapidly believe the statement of a recent writer that in the past twen¬ ty 3 'ears the Catholics o-f America have spent on to $300,000,000 for parish school education. W'hat a splendid lesson of self-sacrifice!” IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR. 57 RT. UEV. MICHAEL J. HOIiAN. 1). D.. Bishop of Scranton, at the Annual Dinner Given by the New England Society of Northeastern Penn¬ sylvania on Dec. 21, 1900, Said in Part: “The President, in his remarks to¬ night, alluded to the fact that the Pilgrim Fathers brought here the Free Public School System, and I say ‘God bless them’ for having done so. You will no doubt agree with me that in a republic it is not only the privilege, but it is the absolute duty of every citizen to know how to read and write; but when the Pilgrims brought that institution here it was not an American idea; in fact, the Free Public School System, as now in existence in these United States, can¬ not be said to have become an Am¬ erican institution until in compara¬ tively late years. • Before our Civil War there was no such system in the South, as far as I can learn; it was a New England adaptation; it was not original with the Pilgrim Fathers, neither did they take it from England, because at the time they fled from the persecution of James I no free public school system existed in England. The free monastic schools had been destroyed by*Henry, and nothing had been substituted for them. When the Pilgrims went to Holland, in 1609, they found a system of public schools in existence fostered and encouraged by the authorities of the State. It was probably aided by the noteworthy letter which John of Nassau, the old¬ est brother of William the Silent, the noble veteran who lived until 1606, wrote to his son, Louis William, Stadt- holder of Friesland. In this letter, which is worthy of a place on the walls of every school house in Am¬ erica, the gallant young Stadtholder is ‘instructed to urge on the States Gen¬ eral that they, according to the ex¬ ample of the Pope and Jesuits, should establish free schools, where children of quality as well as of poor families, for a very small sum, could be well and Christianly educated and brought up. This would be the greatest and most useful work and the highest ser¬ vice that you could ever accomplish for God and Christianity, and especially for the Netherlands themselves. In summa, one may jeer at this Popish trickery, and, undervalue it as one will, there still remains in the work ar. inexpressible benefit. Soldiers and patriots Thus educated, with a true knowledge of God and a Christian conscience—item, churches and schools, good libraries, books and printing presses—are better than all armies, arsenals, armories, munitions, alliances and treaties that can be had or imagined in the world.’ “The system then introduced by the Pope and the Jesuits has been in ex¬ istence ever since, and probably the only country in the world where every child over ten years of age can read and write is in the little Catholic Duchy of Luxemburg. When th*^ Pilgrim Fathers established a system of schools in their colonies they sim¬ ply introduced a system prevalent among the Catholics and Protestants of Holland, and that system was that the children should be taught not only how to read and write, but also that they should be taught the ele¬ ments of morals and religion—in a word, that the whole man should be educated, mentally and spiritually, the heart as well as the head. That is precisely the Catholic doctrine to¬ day. So that we Catholics are the logical successors in the public school system of your Pilgrim Fathers, and we believe that the child should be educated, not only in reading and writing, but also in subjecting the body to the will, will to reason, rea¬ son to faith, and all to charity, which has the virtue of transforming man into God. purified with an infinite love. I know that there is an ele¬ ment of secularism abroad—that there is a tendency to eliminate the question of religion from the public schools; but no lover of his country can witness our young people day after day cultivating their heads at the possible expense of their hearts, eagerly absorbing the knowledge that may bring material gain, but neglect¬ ing the more useful knowledge of the soul, on which will depend their eter¬ nal happiness, without regretting that the sons of New England should have permitted the original system intro¬ duced by their forefathers to have developed along the narrow line of mere secular instruction to the ex¬ clusion of morals and religion.’’ The New York Independent of July 14th, 1904, says editorially: “We cannot touch the public school system today without a full compre¬ hension that it must be readjusted for moral and social ends. It is the school and not the State which today is working a great revolution—a revo¬ lution that will involve not only the intellectual but the moral character of the nation.” IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION AND THE DIGNITY OF LABOR. RELIGION AND EDUCATION. From “The Catholic News” July 16. 1904. Almost every week is fur¬ nished striking- evidence of the fact that leading non-Catholic educators and thinkers are seriously disturbed by the conditions that prevail in the secular schools and colleges of the land. These men have discovered that the indifference and irreligion of the day are to be traced to these institu¬ tions, whence knowledge of the duty mankind owes to God is carefully hid¬ den. At the centenary of the Univer¬ sity of Vermont the Rev. Dr. George B. Spalding, of Syracuse, a member of the university’s class of 1856, preached a discourse in which he spoke plainly of the shortcomings of the past century. He said: “It must be confessed that the nine¬ teenth century has been one of doubt and questioning, and even denial of many philosophical systems and spiritual dogmas, which have already seriously disturbed faith, and threaten to destroy faith even within the cen¬ tury that is now upon us. In the im¬ petus of free thinking, and in the un¬ due emphasis given to the worth of the individual, of his rights and liber¬ ties, we have already lost much of deepest sense of obligation to the law of God, of which we are subjects, and the order of the State and society, of which we are constituent members. Excess of one truth is ruin to any other truth. Anarchy and freedom lie close together. The giant that brandishes its arms over us as a peo¬ ple is lawlessness. And he is the off¬ spring of the very liberty which breeds in the free air of our republic. The holy sanction of the oath of of¬ fice and the marriage vow; the high pride of civic honor and intelligence, seem at times to be dead or dying— not only among men of corrupt lives, but among men of respectability and public position, of financial trust and government authority.” Dr. Spalding believes that unless there is a return to Christian princi¬ ples the ruin of the American repub¬ lic is at hand. The twentieth cen¬ tury’s challenge is, he says, “for a largei, higher science illumined by Christian faith, which shall find an interpretation of man in Jesus Christ as his Saviour. This realm of phil¬ osophy in which unbelief has so long rioted, but is now so sorely worsted, ‘is waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God.' ” Another Protestant clergyman em¬ phasizes the need of God in our na¬ tional life. Preaching in the First church. Boston, the Rev. Thomas Van Ness quoted these words of President Eliot, of Harvard University: “No educational system can be successful¬ ly carried on without, first, education in morals, and no education in morals is possible without the religious life.” Mr. Van Ness regarded these words as highly significant; in fact, as . if they were an entirely new utterance. But Catholics have for years and years been saying the same thing. Until of late, however, they were called traitors for using such lan¬ guage. Happily their view is now en¬ dorsed by a great many of the most eminent Protestants of the land. Mr. Van Ness appreciates the weakness of our secular educational system, for he says: “The need is moralization, not intellectualization; the education of the heart, not the education of the hand. The pressing problem in America is how shall education be moulded so that it shall be character¬ building?” The attitude of these men on the need for introducing religion into education is endorsed by no less an authority than President James, of the famous Methodist institution, North¬ western University. Addressing the 30,000 delegates attending the recent St. Louis convention of the National Educational Association, he made a strong plea for a return to the old- fashioned religious education in schools and colleges. Dr. James said: “A return to the old system, where¬ by the Church can maintain its in¬ fluence in schools and colleges, is needed. Religious schools have been relegated to the rear. Bring them forward. Make them felt in the light of the world. Put them in touch with the religious idea. Schools that are endowed and non-sectarian schools and colleges feel the need of religious thought. Though a great change has been taking place in col¬ leges and schools for higher educa¬ tion, they must have Christianity to exist. Christianity and religion have influenced the world for centuries - they must influence it again, and it must be through the medium of col¬ leges and schools.” The Sacred Heart Review of Tune 2nd, 1904, inquires: “If the secularized public school is the only infallible, factory for turning out good citizens of America, what kind of an American was Georee Washington? He never attended a secular public school.” Kind words are like revelations from heaven, unraveling complicated misunderstandings and softening* hardened convictions of years. A PARAGRAPH FROM M Washington’s Farewell Address” “Of all the 'dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instru¬ ments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles.” And thus spoke “The Immortal George,” “The Father of His Country,” who was “First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.” WORTH REPEATING AND REMEMBERING AS THE TRUE POSI¬ TION OF CATHOLICS ON THE SCHOOL QUESTION “The Federated Catholic Societies of America,” in conven¬ tion at Detroit, in January, 1904, declared their position on the school question to be as follows: “That there shall be no public moneys paid out for religious instruction in any school. Let the State examine parish or private schools, and if, on ex¬ amination, it is found that they are giving the children an edu¬ cation which comes up to the requirements of the State, then let the State pay for it.” A, Date Due L2fl- **Fc;. - Q £ I £3- X f- “Th j. /A lot -?3 -P o iL-OO ible “Perish the the light and withered be tlie hand that would be raised in word or act for the injury of our public schools;” but we also say, with the Royal Prophet: “In vain doth man build a house unless the Lord build with him;” “In vain doth man keep watch over his city unless the Lord watch with him.” mu i v^/v\^UIN I PAMPHLET BINDER PAT. NO. 877188 Manufactured by GAYLORD BROS. Inc. Syracuse, N. Y. Stockton, Calif. 3 9031 01041483 tf O 2 1^14 BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS CHESTNUT HILL, MASS. Books may be kept for two weeks and may be renewed for the same period, unless reserved. Two cents a day is charged for each book kept overtime. If you cannot find what you want, ask the Librarian who will be glad to help you. The borrower is responsible for books drawn on his card and for all fines accruing on the same. * Jr I