Reverend and Dear Father: 
 
 An apology is never needed for a heart-to-heart talk between 
 
 . 
 
 ijie Directors of the Apostleship of Prayer; but at the present 
 juncture the omission of such a more intimate conversation 
 would amount to a positive fault. It is not merely that we 
 are approaching the time best suited for the choice of Pro- 
 moters and the renewal of fervor in the body of the members ; 
 nor do I refer merely to the nearness of the joyful season when 
 the human heart is wont to show itself to its best advantage; 
 but I write under the influence of events that bear an im- 
 portant relation to the welfare of the whole Apostleship of 
 Prayer, and in particular of the portion which is found within 
 the territory of the United States. On April 18 died the 
 Director-General of the Apostleship of Prayer, Father Luis 
 Martin, the Father-General of the Society of Jesus; he has 
 been succeeded by Father Francis Wernz, whose election to 
 the generalship of the Society of Jesus occurred on the Feast 
 of the Nativity of our Blessed Lady, September 8. Besides, 
 the Central Director of the Apostleship existing in the boun- 
 daries of the United States has been called to another field of 
 usefulness, so that our American portion of the Association 
 labors under the disadvantage of a double change. 
 
 It would be an unpardonable ingratitude on our part, were 
 we to pass over the memory of our late Director-General and 
 our former Central Director, without recalling the important 
 services they have rendered to the League of the Sacred 
 Heart. The name of our former Central Director has been 
 identified with the work of the League for the past fifteen 
 years, while Father Luis Martin was Father-General of the 
 
 B °8T0K C 
 
2 Letter of Central Director. 
 
 • 
 
 Society of Jesus since the autumn of 1892. During the period 
 of their admirfistration His Holiness Pope Leo XIII- pro- 
 claimed the new Constitution of the Apostleship of Prayer, 
 which gave the Association a canonically legal standing in the 
 Church; during the same period the Diocesan Directors were 
 first appointed, the number of members began to outgrow all 
 previous record, and the Apostleship flourished as it had never 
 done before. We know that all good gifts come from above, 
 and that our present flourishing condition is due to the love 
 of the Sacred Heart and the grace of the Holy Ghost rather 
 than to any human instrument. At the same time, God s 
 grace and love do not work among men without the instru- 
 mentality of human aid ; and it is in this sense that we here 
 publicly acknowledge the services of our late efficient leaders, 
 and tender them at the same time the expression of our sin- 
 cerest gratitude. 
 
 And in order, that this manifestation of our feelings may 
 not remain an idle expression of sentiment, we must show by 
 our conduct that we appreciate the worth of those men whom 
 it has been our privilege to have for so long a period for our 
 Directors. If there is any quality for which both were noted, 
 it is their untiring activity, their live interest in their charge. 
 They thoroughly realized that the Apostleship of Prayer is 
 a mighty lever for good ; but they realized that it is only a 
 lever, that it is not a sacrament which works ex opere operato, 
 as theologians would say. The Apostleship is a powerful 
 spiritual engine ; but even the most perfect of engines does not 
 work without a supply of power. What does one get out of 
 an engine? Precisely what one puts into it. The engine 
 economizes the power, and applies it to the best advantage 
 in order to obtain certain definite results. Even so it is in 
 the case of the Apostleship of Prayer. 
 
 Our late Directors were not content with merely holding 
 the Diplomas of their respective Directorships ; they did not 
 lay their hands in their laps, merely watching, as it were, the 
 incense of prayer ascending from the Apostleship day after 
 
 196198 •fFTJj! 
 
Letter of Central Director. 
 
 3 
 
 day to the Mercy Seat of God, and the rain of natural and 
 supernatural blessings pouring in answer to these prayers 
 upon our suffering and sin-laden world. Not as if such a 
 sight were not most edifying and helpful ; it is good and use- 
 ful in its own time, but as a general rule the machine must 
 be watched, and the supply of power must be kept in view. 
 
 It is true that the machinery of our Association is most 
 simple : the Director-General, the Diocesan Directors, the 
 Local Directors, and the Promoters constitute practically our 
 entire official personel. But this simplicity does not do away 
 with the need of active interest on the part of each officer. 
 Even the old pagan philosopher reduced all movement to the 
 prime mover ; the nature of things has not changed since his 
 time, so that in our days, too, all movement is in proportion 
 to the activity of the prime mover. Thanks be to God for the 
 amount of consoling news which our mail man brings us 
 almost daily ; but we thank the Directors too for the zeal they 
 display. Of the 11,584 churches and 2,206 pious Institutions 
 in the United States, 5,144 churches and 1,541 pious Institu- 
 tions are now aggregated to the Apostleship of Prayer. There 
 are, therefore, in all, 6,685 Local Centers in the United States. 
 In order to show that the League is not at a stand-still, we 
 may mention that of these 6,685 Local Centers, 948 have been 
 aggregated since January, 1902; of these new aggregations, 
 800 were churches, and 146 pious Institutions. And the spread 
 of Promoters has kept an even pace with the erection of new 
 Centers. During the past five years 28,331 Promoters re- 
 ceived their Cross and Diploma. The present status of the 
 Apostleship becomes more satisfactory still, if we consider 
 that of the 11,814 churches, 3,941 are missionary posts with 
 no resident priest ; many of these belong to the Local Centers 
 of those churches from which they are attended. 
 
 But consoling as these figures may be, they are not such as 
 to warrant the Directors to rest satisfied with our present 
 condition. If the Diocesan Directors look over the list of 
 Local Centers situated in their respective dioceses, they will 
 
4 
 
 Letter of Central Director. 
 
 notice that many parishes within the sphere of their Director- 
 ship are not as yet aggregated to our Association. In the 
 same way, the Local Directors need only consult their Registers 
 in order to become convinced that a great number of parish- 
 ioners are not as yet members of the Apostleship of Prayer. 
 The Directors are well acquainted with the staple exception 
 that the other pious Associations must be allowed to exist, 
 that the parishes or parishioners not aggregated to the Apos- 
 tleship belong to sodalities and other religious societies. Need 
 we repeat the assurance that the League does not interfere 
 with any other pious union? It does not impose any obliga- 
 tion at variance with the requirements of any sodality or so- 
 ciety. At the same time, it infuses into all its members a spirit 
 that will make better sodalists, better parishioners, better 
 Catholics. 
 
 Not as if we expected the Directors to exercise their energy 
 in directions foreign to their position. The Diocesan Directors 
 are supposed to assist the priests in their respective dioceses 
 to organize or reorganize the League, by directing them per- 
 sonally or by letters, by preaching, or by forming Centers for 
 them. If their other duties should ever interfere with these 
 obligations, we shall be only too glad to perform this service 
 for them, either by corresponding with Local Directors, or, 
 so far as time and distance permit, by preaching, or organizing 
 Centers. The Diocesan Director will fail in his duty if he is 
 not able and ready to give every applicant for aggregation 
 the benefit of his own example and experience in managing a 
 well organized Center, to make suggestions for improving the 
 work, to solve difficulties, satisfy complaints, and clear up 
 misunderstandings. Your zeal will suggest to you the proper 
 occasions on which your work may be done most advanta- 
 geously : when you meet your fellow-priests in Conference, 
 Retreat, or Synod, when pastors are changed, or new parishes 
 are erected. Any help or direction you need in the perfor- 
 mance of these various duties, we shall be only too happy to 
 give. 
 
Letter of Central Director. 
 
 5 
 
 The Local Directors, too, have their own peculiar sphere of 
 duties : they must recommend and explain the General Inten- 
 tion every month, they must keep the Register of Aggregation 
 faithfully, distribute the members among the bands of Pro- 
 moters most advantageously, regulate the monthly com- 
 munions, supervise the distribution of Leaflets, select and train 
 Promoters, and above all hold the monthly Promoters’ meet- 
 ings. In their dealing with Promoters, they ought to proceed 
 without any respect for person ; Promoters should be chosen 
 from every class of society, from among men as well as 
 women ; they should be advanced according to their degree 
 of efficiency, and they ought to be replaced as soon as they 
 show themselves inefficient in the discharge of their various 
 duties. The Local Director must urge the various practices 
 of the Apostleship, the Morning Offering, the daily Decade of 
 Hail Marys, the Communion of Reparation, and the Holy 
 Hour ; he must be exacting in his members’ attention to the 
 Treasury of Good Works, to the reading of the Leaflets and 
 of the Messenger of the Sacred Heart. If the Local Director 
 is attentive to his duties, the First Friday will be a red letter 
 day in the life of the parish, not merely in its female but also 
 in its male contingent. 
 
 We have compared the Apostleship of Prayer to an engine: 
 the Directors are the engineers ; but whence comes the power ? 
 The power is the love of the Sacred Heart. Our Association 
 is the Apostleship of Prayer in League with the Sacred Heart. 
 It is with a view of increasing this power that I forward with 
 this letter a Theological Study of the Devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart. The author, who is one of Europe's foremost Canon- 
 ists, clearly distinguishes between what is certain and what 
 is merely probable in his treatise ; the reader may disagree with 
 the writer on controverted points, but he cannot afford to 
 neglect this pamphlet. On our part, we present it to the Dio- 
 cesan and Local Directors for the love of the Sacred Heart ; 
 let the Directors for the love of that same Heart sacrifice 
 enough of their time to read and study it. If they are faithful 
 
G 
 
 Letter of Central Director. 
 
 to their part of this compact, both Directors and members of 
 the Apostleship of Prayer in the United States will be animated 
 with a new degree of love for the Sacred Heart, a gift more 
 precious than any “ Merry Christmas ” or “ Happy New 
 Year ” wishes they may receive from their earthly friends. 
 
 In union with your prayers and holy sacrifices, 
 
 Yours sincerely in Christ, 
 
 A. J. Maas, S.J. 
 
 Central Office of the Apostleship of Prayer, 
 
 27-29 West 16th Street, New York. 
 
 On the Feast of Blessed Margaret Mary. 
 
The Proper Object 
 
 of the 
 
 Devotion to the Sacred Heart 
 
 A THEOLOGICAL STUDY 
 
 By the 
 
 Rev. A. Vermeersch, S.J. 
 
 Translation and Reprint of Two Articles Published in the Etudes 
 for January 20 and February 20, 1906 
 
 With a Letter of the Central Director to all Diocesan and Local Directors 
 
 Apostleship of Prayer, 
 27-29 W. 1 6th St., New York. 
 
PX- 
 
 /A57 
 
 • V/f X 
 
 Respectfully Dedicated 
 to the 
 
 Diocesan and Local Directors of the Apostleship of Prayer 
 
 in the 
 
 United States of North America. 
 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Letter of Central Director 1 
 
 Introduction 11 
 
 Chapter I. Preliminary Ideas : General View of Devo- 
 tions, Sources to be consulted. 13 
 
 Chapter II. The Proper and Direct Object of the Wor- 
 ship : the Human, Living Heart of Our Lord Jesus 
 
 Christ 16 
 
 Chapter III. The Living Heart of the Redeemer Con- 
 sidered in Connection with Love 18 
 
 Chapter IV. The Proper Object of the Devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart is the Heart of Christ as a Real Symbol 
 
 of His Love 20 
 
 (j) What is a Symbol? 21 
 
 ( 2 ) The Heart is a Symbol of Human Affections. . 22 
 
 (j) The Heart of Christ is Taken as a Symbol. ... 23 
 
 (4) Important Corollary: the Material and Formal 
 
 Object of the Devotion 24 
 
 Chapter V. The Love of Which the Heart of Jesus is 
 
 the Symbol 27 
 
 (1) The Mystery of the Incarnation. Created and 
 
 Uncreated Love. The Question Considered from 
 This Point of View 28 
 
 ( 2 ) Authors’ Opinions . 30 
 
 Preliminary Observations 30 
 
 Father de La Colmbiere, S.J 32 
 
 Father Croiset, S.J o. 
 
 Father Froment, S.J 33 
 
 Father de Gallifet, S.J 34 
 
 Cardinal Gerdil 35 
 
 Benoit Tetamo, S.J 35 
 
 Emmanuel Marques 35 
 
 Frangois- Antoine Zaccaria, S.J 36 
 
 Muzzarelli 37 
 
 Father Roothaan, S.J 37 
 
10 
 
 Contents. 
 
 Father Gautrelet, S.J 38 
 
 Cardinal Franzelin, S.J 38 
 
 Fathers de San and Nilles, S.J 38 
 
 Canon Leroy 39 
 
 Father Bucceroni, S.J 39 
 
 Father Bernard Dalgairns 39 
 
 Father Chevalier 39 
 
 Father Billot, S.J 39 
 
 Fathers A. Martorell and Joseph Castella, S.J. . . 40 
 
 Father J. B. Terrien, S.J 40 
 
 Abbe Baruteil 41 
 
 Father Thill 41 
 
 (j) Decree of the Holy See: Memorial of Polish 
 Bishops, Clement XIII, Pius VI, Pius VII, Pius 
 IX, Fathers of the Vatican Council, Congrega- 
 tion of Rites, Pauline Epistles 42 
 
 ( 4 ) A Theological Examination of the Question: 48 
 
 A. In What Sense Uncreated Love is Necessarily 
 
 Understood in the Devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart 49 
 
 B. The Value and Dignity of Christ’s Created 
 
 Love 50 
 
 C. Why the Special Reason for the Devotion to 
 
 the Sacred Heart is Furnished by Created, Not 
 Uncreated, Love 52 
 
 D. How in a Broad Sense Uncreated Love May 
 Become the Special Object of the Devotion to 
 
 the Sacred Heart 56 
 
 E. Conclusions and Corollaries 59 
 
 Chapter VI. Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament Com- 
 pared with the Devotion to the Sacred Heart 63 
 
 Chapter VII. Devotion to the Holy Ghost Compared 
 
 with the Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. ... 65 
 
 Appendix, i. Devotion to the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus. 
 
 2 . The Practice of the Devotion to the Heart of Jesus, 
 j. Acts of Devotion. t , 67 
 
THE PROPER OBJECT OF THE DEVOTION 
 TO THE SACRED HEART. 
 
 A Theological Study. (1) 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 Although devotions which are already prosperous thrive 
 on reinforcement of light and heat, there is nevertheless a 
 certain exuberance of life that is prejudicial to them. Too 
 many minds have but an inadequate knowledge of them and 
 this, coupled with a desire for novelty or originality, is seri- 
 ously apt to engender mistakes and errors. Side by side with 
 elaborations which are really precious for the defense or clear 
 understanding of a form or practice of worship, *are those 
 which so distort the object of that worship as to misdirect 
 both thought and homage. An indiscreet zeal will so dilate 
 upon the special value of a devotion as to lessen rather than 
 increase its influence and utility, and it is above all after the 
 
 (1) This article is intended to refute^ a specious and seductive 
 opinion now gaining ground and in which we cannot fail to see unfor- 
 tunate blunders and confusion. The relative favor which it enjoys 
 would seem to us due to an inadequate understanding of the subject, 
 and we have thought to further the interests of the true devotion to 
 the Sacred Heart by awakening serious reflection on a question which 
 we know is already receiving great attention in Germany and Austria. 
 The hearty welcome heretofore accorded our article on The Great 
 Promise by the readers of Etudes has naturally inspired us to dedicate 
 this new work to them. 
 
 11 
 
12 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 triumph of a cause, when we withdraw our attention from a 
 tedious opposition at length reduced to silence, that curiosity 
 and a fear of the commonplace threaten to mislead us. “ I 
 will not speak to you of the Sacred Heart,” wrote Mgr. 
 d’Hulst, May 31, 1883.(1) “It has already been too deeply 
 wronged by over-ardent enthusiasts. Our Lord Himself must 
 tell you of It; we speak of It too unworthily.” 
 
 These words are most significant: they justify our first 
 pages wherein we propose to write simply of the object of 
 the devotion that we may write of it well. A first section will 
 contain some preliminary remarks, and the three following 
 will succinctly set forth ideas supported by a concise demon- 
 stration, and so generally accepted as to be considered definitely 
 established. Hence, by passing through these successive 
 stages we will come into possession of the light prepared 
 by preceding works for friends of the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart. All honor to our illustrious predecessors ! 
 
 Now, however important these generally accepted ideas, 
 they do not furnish a definition of the object in all its bear- 
 ings and, as we shall see, at least one of these remains ob- 
 scure. Although we do not deem the solution of the question 
 difficult, it is certainly worthy of any effort entailed, since it 
 deals with the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word, a 
 mystery so dear to our hearts ; it influences preaching and, 
 in itself a sufficient advantage, states most accurately the 
 object of the great devotion of our time, the devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart. Impelled by a desire to elucidate this ques- 
 tion, we shall endeavor to do so in a fifth section. 
 
 The last two sections may be called complementary; we 
 shall compare the devotion to the Sacred Heart with the 
 devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and the worship of the 
 Holy Ghost in order, by this comparison, to throw into as 
 strong a light as possible the complete and exact object of 
 the homage which we pay to the Heart of our Saviour, Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 (l) Letters of Direction, p. 74. 
 
Preliminary Ideas. 
 
 13 
 
 In the Appendix we shall say a few words on devotion to 
 the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, and dwell briefly on the prac- 
 tice of devotion to the Sacred Heart as it has been taught us 
 by two of its greatest promoters and exponents, Fathers 
 Croiset and de Gallifet. 
 
 In discussing the question which, above all, has captivated 
 our interest, it is impossible to avoid partial disagreement with 
 writers for whom we otherwise profess the greatest esteem ; 
 but surely they should be neither astonished nor offended by 
 a contradiction, prompted as they are by such a desire as actu- 
 ates them, to extend the true reign of the Heart of Jesus. 
 However, though indicating in perfectly good faith, the errors 
 or inaccuracies of others, we ourselves are laying no claim to 
 infallibility. Prior to writing we joined much reading to our 
 personal reflections, and submitted our ideas to several judges 
 especially well versed in theological science. Encouraged by 
 their approbation, we offer our conclusions to the public, 
 though not without the sincere assurance of our willingness to 
 surrender to stronger arguments. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Preliminary Ideas. 
 
 General View of Devotions. — When considering that which 
 prompts honor and homage, and to what they are directed, 
 we should distinguish between the person who receives, the 
 excellence which justifies, and the manifestation which occa- 
 sions them. 
 
 Homage is always received by a person and proportioned to 
 his dignity. (1) 
 
 Some special quality of such a person, more frequently than 
 his entire personality, entitles him to homage, and is the ex- 
 cellence prompting it, or, to speak philosophically, constitutes 
 its formal object. 
 
 This quality is gathered by its manifestations : if it does not 
 
 (1) Saint Thomas’s Summa theol., part III, p. XXV, a. 1. 
 
14 Preliminary Ideas. 
 
 flash out from some part of the person it is demonstrated by 
 acts and works. 
 
 Thus, even in the human order, we accord a king the royal 
 honor due to his character, while at the same time we admire 
 the masculine beauty of his features, and do homage to his 
 intellectual abilities as shown by the wisdom of his adminis- 
 tration, and the goodness of his heart as manifested by his 
 benefactions. 
 
 We might say indifferently that we specially honor the 
 king because of his beauty, his intellect or his heart, or that 
 we admire his beauty, praise his intelligence and extol his 
 goodness. 
 
 Applied to the worship of the Sacred Heart, these simple 
 reflections show us that, by this worship, we honor the Person 
 of Our Lord Jesus Christ; that it is the supreme worship due 
 to God alone, as Jesus Christ is God(l) adorable in all that 
 is united to His Person, particularly in His Heart; and that 
 it is a special worship inasmuch as it is prompted by a quality 
 which the heart possesses or represents. 
 
 The Person of Our Lord Jesus Christ, its excellences, all of 
 which are infinite in dignity, are the common object, the gen- 
 eral reason of all the feasts and of all the devotions by which 
 Our Lord is glorified. In order to become acquainted with 
 the proper object or the special justification of the devotion to 
 the Sacred Heart and of the corresponding feast, it is neces- 
 sary to understand what is meant by the Heart of Our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, under what aspect it is considered, and what 
 quality attracts our homage. It is, therefore, around these 
 points that the interest of our study centers. 
 
 Sources to be consulted. In all questions of worship the 
 science of revelation should be carefully consulted. All in- 
 terpretations which contradict its indubitable teachings are 
 false, and such as do not tally with its principles and traditions 
 on the economy of our salvation are questionable ; whilst a 
 favorable pre judgment militates for a theory that harmonizes 
 
 (1) Later on we shall explain in fuller detail how Jesus Christ is 
 adorable even in His humanity. 
 
Preliminary Ideas. 
 
 15 
 
 with the general principles of theology. Besides this rather 
 negative mission, theology has another, that, of showing in the 
 deposit of faith the indispensable foundation of every solid 
 devotion. 
 
 Great devotions have their genesis, their history. Most fre- 
 quently their beginnings are connected with some extraordi- 
 nary providential event and with an initiative which at first 
 suffers opposition, then triumphs, and, after a series of tests, 
 at length wins the approbation and later the encouragement 
 of ecclesiastical authority. The opinion of those who pro- 
 moted it, and above all those decrees of the Holy See which 
 confirm or correct it, will furnish the principal elements of 
 positive explanation. 
 
 The study and discussion of these elements lead to a more 
 distinct and adequate understanding of the object and nature 
 of the worship. 
 
 By way of resume the following formula might be proposed : 
 A knowledge of " the proper object of the devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart springs chiefly from the theological examination 
 of data furnished by the origin of the devotion and the de- 
 cisions of the Holy See. 
 
 In corroboration of these statements we quote two testi- 
 monies. 
 
 The worship of the Sacred Heart is no longer a private one 
 but has become public, and in all churches the feast of the 
 Sacred Heart is celebrated. “ Therefore/’ says Father 
 Nilles(l) “ the decrees and public acts of the Holy See should 
 be referred to, and the classic authors who have treated the 
 question be consulted.” And Father de Gallifet, the prin- 
 cipal private authority to be invoked, says: (2) “Since the 
 devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus had its origin in a 
 heavenly revelation, in this revelation must be sought ^the 
 object of worship, and the manner in which the devotion 
 should be practiced.” 
 
 (1) De Rationibus festorum SS. Cordis Iesu, etc., 1. p. 328. 
 
 (2) De Cultu Sacrosancti Cordis, etc., book I, chap. IV. 
 
16 
 
 The Proper and Direct Object of Worship. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Proper and Direct Object of Worship: the Human, 
 Living Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 The object of the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus is, 
 first of all, the real , living Heart that beats in the bosom of 
 Our Saviour, that forms a part of His humanity and was 
 pierced on the cross. In His great apparitions to Blessed 
 Margaret Mary, Our Lord discloses this real, living heart, 
 and when the heart is separately represented the wound in- 
 flicted on the cross figures prominently. For a conclusive 
 proof a line taken from the account of the most solemn mani- 
 festation with which the Blessed one was favored should 
 suffice : “ And showing me His Heart, He said : ‘ Behold the 
 Heart which has loved men so much.’”(l) 
 
 A peremptory argument is likewise furnished -by the apos- 
 tolic constitution Auctorem fidei, of August 28, 1794. In 
 condemning the 63rd proposition of the Jansenistic Synod of 
 Pistoja, Pius VI clearly acknowledges in this constitution 
 that the faithful adore the Heart of Jesus, that is to say, the 
 Heart of the Person of the Word, the Heart indissolubly 
 united to this Person in the same way in which, after death, 
 His Body, inseparable from His Divinity and without making 
 abstraction of it, was adorable in the tomb. (2) 
 
 The last words of Pius VI are sufficiently clear: the heart 
 is not isolated and, as it were, extracted from the Body ; we 
 honor a Heart intimately united to the Soul of Jesus and to 
 His Divine Person, “ the Heart which, with the Soul of Jesus 
 and His Divine Person, constitutes a single object of adora- 
 tion. . . . This object,” continues Father de Gallifet, “ is 
 
 formed of the Heart of Jesus, the Soul of Jesus, and the 
 Person of the Son of God, by joining thereunto all the graces, 
 
 (1) Life and Works of Blessed Margaret Mary Alacoque, vol. II, pp. 
 270 , 327 , 355 . 
 
 (2) “ Illud adorant ut est cor Jesu, cor nempe personae Verbi, cui 
 inseparabiliter unitum est, ad enm modum quo exsangue corpus Christi, 
 in triduo mortis, sine separatione aut praecisione a divinitate, adorabile 
 fuit in sepulcro.” 
 
The Proper and Direct Object of Worship. 17 
 
 all the treasures of heavenly gifts, all the virtues and all the 
 affections peculiar to that Heart.” (1) 
 
 This point is therefore well established. In our devotion 
 the word heart is not a metaphorical term used to convey the 
 idea of love, and if, as we shall see, this idea dominates, it 
 cannot therefore be said that the worship is improperly called 
 that of the Sacred Heart and is in reality the devotion of the 
 love of Christ irrespective of the Heart of Flesh which repre- 
 sents that love. Such was the view held by Catholics hostile 
 to the devotion, when the decree of approbation appeared in 
 1765.(2) According to this document the worship of the 
 Sacred Heart consisted in symbolically renewing our love of 
 the Son of God, etc. Mistaking the value of the term “ sym- 
 bolic renewal,” a certain Blasius, together with others of the 
 same school, maintained that, in the decree, there was no 
 question of honoring a heart of flesh but a purely symbolic 
 heart, or, to be more accurate, (3) a heart in the general sense, 
 taken metaphorically for the affections. (4) But besides the 
 fact that “ the symbolic renewal ” supposes a real symbol, 
 viz., the living Heart of Christ, it suffices to refute this system 
 to recall that the decrees approved the devotion such as it had 
 been represented by the bishops of Poland in their petition 
 wherein they stated that they understood the word heart in its 
 proper sense and not metaphorically. (5) And in regard to 
 this Zaccaria declared : “ The feast of a purely symbolic 
 
 heart will never be, either properly or improperly, a feast of 
 the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (6) 
 
 Devotion to the Sacred Heart honors the real Heart of 
 Jesus; in section 3rd we shall see under what aspect. 
 
 (1) De Cultu . . . , book I, chap. IV. Benedict XIV mentions 
 
 this idea as that of the promoters of the devotion. (De Beatidcatione, 
 book IV, chap. XXXI. n. 21.) 
 
 (2) The decree will be quoted later on among the documents of the 
 Holy See. 
 
 (3) A symbolic heart may be a very real heart. See section IV. 
 
 (4) See, for example, Franzelin’s De Verbo incarnato 3, pp. 470, 471. 
 
 (5) Cor Jesu, non tralatitie sumptum, sed in propria ac nativa signid- 
 catione, videlicet ut est pars corporis Christi nobilissima. 
 
 (6) Fr. Ant. Zaccaria, Antidoto contra i libri di Blasi . . . lett 
 
 VI, p. 61 . 
 
18 
 
 The Living Heart in Connection with Love. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Living Heart of the Redeemer Considered in Con- 
 nection with Love. 
 
 To ask how the Divine Heart of Jesus is regarded in the 
 practice of the devotion is to inquire into the quality which 
 makes the heart the proper object of this devotion, viz., to 
 seek the formal element of this object and the special aspect 
 under which it is considered; just as upon investigating we 
 find that color is the formal object of sight and sound the 
 formal object of hearing, because the eye perceives an object 
 inasmuch as it is colored and the ear detects it inasmuch as it 
 is sonorous. 
 
 The living Heart is a part of Our Lord’s Body, and, as 
 such, it is adorable. But it is not therefore chosen as the 
 object of a special devotion. If it were, why should not all 
 other parts of Christ’s Body, though lacking sentiment, knowl- 
 edge and affection, just as well be glorified, and, as was ob- 
 jected by the Promoter of the Faith, there would then be as 
 many feasts as the body has parts or members. But of course 
 such a view was never seriously entertained. (1) 
 
 Now, the heart is chosen because it is overflowing with love 
 for men and wounded by their ingratitude. Thus we find in 
 the revelations of Blessed Margaret Mary : “ Behold the 
 
 Heart which has loved men so much. . . . Instead of 
 
 gratitude, I receive from the greater part (of mankind) only 
 ingratitude and Father de Gallifet tells us(2) that there is a 
 like expression in the Memorial offered to the Congregation of 
 Rites under Benedict XIII. (3) 
 
 1. We say overflowing with love, not that the heart must 
 necessarily be considered the seat of sensible affections — the 
 Sacred Congregation wishing to avoid a philosophical con- 
 troversy opposed at the very outset by the Promoter of the 
 
 (1) Defenders’ reply to the objections of the Promoter of the Faith. 
 
 (Nilles, De Rationibus. . . . V, n. 17, p. 145.) 
 
 (2) De Cnltu . . . , book I, chap. IV. 
 
 (3) Cor quatenus amove hominum ardentissimum , pro peccatis atHic- 
 tissimum. 
 
The Living Heart in Connection with Love. 10 
 
 Faith, the future Pope, Benedict XIV(l) — but because there 
 is an intimate, undeniable correspondence between the move- 
 ments of the heart and our affections, sensible as well as spir- 
 itual, nay, even supernatural, since the heart feels the im- 
 pressions of our affections. (2) 
 
 Moreover, the wound that opened this Heart betokened an 
 extreme love, a love which was ready to sacrifice even life 
 itself, and the same thought is expressed when it is said that 
 the heart is taken as an object inasmuch as it is the universally 
 accepted symbol of the love of Christ. However, this borders 
 upon matter to be discussed in the following section, and we 
 must not anticipate. 
 
 2. The Heart, as we have said, is considered as wounded 
 by our ingratitude. This point is demonstrated by the words 
 of the revelation already quoted:. “Instead of gratitude, i 
 receive from the greater part (of mankind) only ingratitude. 
 
 . . . But what is still more painful to Me is that they are 
 
 hearts consecrated to Me.” At any rate, this is admitted with- 
 out dispute. Father de Gallifet says {op. cit. } Book I, chap. 
 IV) : “ For the perfect understanding of this worship it is 
 not enough to consider the Heart of Jesus as united to His 
 Divinity and overflowing with love for men and. for this 
 twofold reason, worthy of our adoration and love ; we must 
 likewise consider the cruel insults which It suffered from 
 the ingratitude of men, the atrocious injuries heaped upon It 
 and that It therefore merits not only our love but also, if we 
 may be permitted so to speak, our sympathy and compassion.” 
 
 Our Saviour suffered grievously in His mortal life, (3) and 
 especially on the night of His agony in the Garden of Olives 
 when He was in the agony of His Passion because experi- 
 encing the passion of His Heart. (4) 
 
 (1) De Beatihcatione, book IV, chap. XXXI, n. 25. 
 
 (2) Nilles, De Rationibus . . . edit. 5, p. 332 note. 
 
 (3) Olim, “of old,” says Father de Gallifet, De Cultn . . . , 
 book I, chap. IV. 
 
 (2) “This mystery of the agony is a holy of holies. It is the heart 
 of the passion of Christ, because it is the passion of His Heart.” (Mgr. 
 Gay in Meditations on the Mysteries of the Rosary.) 
 
20 The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 Without debarring other conclusive proofs of the love of 
 Christ, we maintain that the devotion to the Sacred Heart 
 is connected chiefly with these two: the sufferings of the 
 Passion and the institution of the Holy Eucharist. According 
 to Blessed Margaret Mary, scarcely had Our Lord repre- 
 sented His Heart as exhausting Itself in conquering men by 
 Its tenderness, than He complained of the insults of which 
 He is the object in the sacrament of His love. “ The par- 
 ticular object of this devotion,” says Father Croiset,(l) “is 
 the immense love of the Son of God, which has led Him to de- 
 liver Himself up to death for us and to give Himself entirely 
 to us in the most holy Sacrament of the Altar.” “ The Heart 
 of Jesus,” adds Father de San, (2) “is, in a strict sense, the 
 symbol of the created love of Christ for us, above all of the 
 love which He manifests- for us in His passion and in the 
 Eucharist." The love that we honor and that is referred to in 
 the sixth lesson of the Breviary is the love of Our suffering 
 Saviour, Who instituted the sacrament of His Body and 
 Blood in memory of His death. 
 
 Conclusion. Father de Gallifet’s definition is therefore 
 justified: The worship of the Sacred Heart honors the Divine 
 Heart of Jesus as burning with love for nien and at the same 
 time deeply wounded (in the past) because of the insults with 
 which, in their ungrateful impiety, these men overwhelm It. (3) 
 
 CHAPTER IV. • 
 
 The Proper Object of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart 
 is the Heart of Christ, as a Real Symbol 
 
 of His Love. 
 
 All these questions are interlinked. We have asked our- 
 selves why this Heart is the object of a special devotion, and 
 have found that it is because of the bonds uniting It to the 
 love of Jesus Christ, and this answer suggests a comple- 
 mentary question : Why choose It because of these bonds ? 
 
 (1) La Devotion au Sacre Cceur, beginning of chap. I, part I. 
 
 (2) De Verbo incarnato, chap. XXI. 
 
 (3) De Cultu . . . , book III, chap. 3. 
 
The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 21 
 
 To this we would reply: Because these bonds make It the 
 universally accepted symbol of love and, on that account, the 
 best sensible representation of that love. 
 
 However, if we would pass successfully through the third 
 stage leading to a clear, distinct knowledge of the object of 
 the devotion to the Sacred Heart, we must explain symbolism. 
 
 i. A symbol is a sensible reality, taken to represent another 
 reality, abstract or spiritual. We resort to concrete symbols 
 in order to clothe in a material form better adapted to our 
 faculties, spiritual things of which we have no exact concep- 
 tion. 
 
 This substitution of one reality for another is founded on 
 analogy which often consists in resemblances real or figura- 
 tive, as when we symbolize purity by a white lily; meekness 
 by a lamb or a dove ; the ardor of passion by a flame. These 
 resemblances sometimes lie in the real connection between 
 two objects, especially that uniting cause to effect: health, 
 for instance, is symbolized by the flush which it brings to the 
 cheek; intellect by the head, where, on account of the brain, 
 we suppose it to be placed. (1) 
 
 Symbolism founded on real bonds is limited to the object 
 which is in effective correspondence with the reality sym- 
 bolized. While every lion may symbolize strength and every 
 
 (l) Although both are founded oh resemblances and destined to 
 satisfy our need of concrete representations, symbols and metaphors 
 are separated by characteristic differences which must not be lost to 
 view. A metaphor distorts the real meaning of a word ; a symbol 
 preserves it. The former hides the object usually signified — as, for 
 instance, a lion, from which the qualification of strength is withdrawn 
 for the sake of clothing another object, Achilles, for example. A 
 symbol requires that the object itself represent, under its own colors, 
 another object, farther removed, more abstract; in a metaphor the 
 word causes the disappearance of a proximate reality, whereas in 
 a symbol such a reality is conveyed by the word. Moreover, the symbol 
 enables us to simplify, synthetize and unify. Thus, a simple flag 
 represents the complex idea of country, fatherland. We cannot, there- 
 fore, approve what M. Baruteil wrote in his Genese du culte du 
 'Sacre Cceur, p. 43). “What, then, is the symbolic heart?” It is 
 nothing but the reunion of the real heart and the metaphorical heart. 
 Now, in the same expression and the same use, the word is not at once 
 adapted to the real and the figurative meaning. A symbol does not 
 suppose a metaphor, was not created by it; rather the symbolical use 
 of the heart has made the metaphor. The symbolic heart is the real 
 heart in its real function of symbolizing love. 
 
22 The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 lamb meekness, only one’s health is really symbolized by the 
 flush on the cheek and only one’s intellect represented by the 
 head. Nevertheless, bright colors may serve as a symbol of 
 health in general and the head as a symbol of intelligence ; 
 but as soon as we individualize the object we must also indi- 
 vidualize this kind of symbols. 
 
 2 . Hence it is easy to see how the heart, without in the least 
 resembling love, without even being the seat of any affection . 
 is nevertheless the real and natural symbol of the human 
 affections. 
 
 On the one hand, although the heart be hidden in the bosom, 
 hearts that we have seen enable us to conceive a clear image 
 of the heart of someone ; onr the other hand, although we 
 cannot (at least at the present time)(l) read in the heart 
 the sentiments to which the rhythm of its movements corre- 
 sponds, this correspondence causes us to attribute to it these 
 sentiments themselves : we localize them in the heart ; in it 
 we seem to discern the principles of the affections ; our imag- 
 ination pictures it under that form ; the heart becomes the 
 real and natural symbol of love. Father Billot could therefore 
 write : “ The heart is the symbol of love because it is its 
 
 organ," (2) an indisputable proposition if we take the term 
 organ in its broad acceptation, supposing nothing but simple 
 repercussions. 
 
 We employ this symbolism of the human form when we 
 represent by it pure spirits, even the Divinity Itself ; the heart 
 of the fictitious body with which we endow them is the 
 symbol of their love, and we speak of the Heart of God as 
 we would of the heart of man. Only here, and this remark 
 will be of weight in what follows, the reality of symbolism 
 disappears with the reality of the body and the heart : it is 
 as purely imaginary as the entire body to which it relates. 
 
 There is a metaphor connected with the symbolism of the 
 heart, according to which the heart signifies the will inasmuch 
 as the will loves ; hence, it is important to distinguish carefully 
 
 (1) Some physiologists are still hopeful of reaching this point. 
 
 (2) De Verbo incarnato, th. 36, coroll., p. 332. 
 
The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 23 
 
 between the symbolic aspect peculiar to the real heart and the 
 metaphorical use of the word heart. (1) 
 
 These explanations clearly set forth the trend and meaning 
 of the proposition: In the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the 
 heart is not taken in a metaphorical sense as we have shown 
 in Section II, but as the real and natural symbol of love, and 
 this brings us back to the proposition with which this section 
 was opened, a proposition easily demonstrated. 
 
 j. The Heart of Christ is taken as a symbol. The Acts of 
 the Holy See, beginning with the first decree of 1765, afford 
 unvarying proof of it. They mention the symbolic renewal of 
 memory, the symbolic image of charity. (See quotations 
 farther on.) 
 
 It is taken as a real symbol, (a) It was His true living 
 Heart that Our Lord showed to Blessed Margaret Mary, and 
 it was of this Heart that He said : “ Behold the Heart which 
 has loved so much.” Now, is not to love with a true, living 
 heart, to produce affections or to feel their impressions? 
 
 (b) Father de Gallifet and the defenders of the cause ap- 
 pealed incessantly to the effective correspondence between the 
 heart and the emotions. Later, Pius IX proclaimed that the 
 worship of the Sacred Heart was that of a heart burning with 
 love for mankind, of a heart which is the seat of Divine Love. 
 (See quotations farther on.) 
 
 ( c ) If the devotion to the Sacred Heart be founded on a 
 simple metaphor, there is no reason whatever for uniting 
 one’s self to the physical, living Heart of Our Lord. The 
 enemies of the devotion understand this well, and we have 
 refuted their claims above. 
 
 ( d ) This truth, already evident, springs from the difference 
 which the Acts of the Holy See establish and maintain be- 
 tween the worship of the Sacred Heart and that of the Holy 
 Face. While they formally acknowledge and approve the 
 
 (1) Some authors speak of a symbolic heart as one taken in a 
 ■figurative sense. Such language we hold to be defective. A symbolic 
 heart is any heart used as a symbol. Now, symbolism belongs above 
 all to a real heart, but it could pass thence to an imaginary heart, 
 although even the use of the word heart is not metaphorical . 
 
24 The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 homage rendered the living Heart of the Saviour, they dis- 
 approve the special and direct homage paid to the Holy 
 Face.(l) They admit that we continue to venerate the an- 
 tique picture of the mangled Face of the Saviour and copies 
 of it, in order thereby to excite ourselves to a livelier and 
 more effectual remembrance of Our Saviour’s passion. (2) 
 In the devotion to the Sacred Heart the image of the heart 
 is not the symbol we honor; it merely represents the true, 
 living Heart which Itself is the real and natural symbol of 
 love , and therefore receives our homage ; in devotion to the 
 Holy Face, the picture does not induce us to honor the real 
 Face of Our Saviour but His passion, symbolically expressed 
 on canvas. While just in its application to the worship of 
 the Holy Face, this idea would be false if applied to the wor- 
 ship of the Sacred Heart, being that held by Catholics tainted 
 with Jansenism. After this example we can better under- 
 stand what the purely symbolic heart was, which, according 
 to them, entered into the devotion to the Heart of Jesus. 
 
 But these proofs are superfluous, and we can unhesitatingly 
 formulate our new conclusion: the proper object of the de- 
 votion to the Sacred Heart is the heart, the real symbol of 
 Christ's love; and, in this object, the formal element is the 
 quality of real symbol. In other words, the heart is honored 
 because and inasmuch as it is ( identically ) the real symbol 
 of the love of Jesus Christ. 
 
 4 . Important Corollary. The aspect under which we con- 
 sider the heart recalls what we are emphatically told elsewhere 
 
 (1) Decree of the Holy Office, May 4-5, 1892. ( Acta Sancta Sedis, 
 
 25 , 749.) 
 
 (2) Some may perhaps wonder why the deep imprint of suffering 
 on the mangled Face of the Saviour would not justify a special de- 
 votion to that Face, as the bond with love justifies a particular devotion 
 to the Heart of Jesus. We note two differences. The adorable Face 
 of Jesus is not altogether expressive of sorrow, and where were once 
 the bleeding stigmata is now an effulgence of purest joy. Hence the 
 real Face of the Saviour could not be a symbol of suffering and the 
 suffering Face does not correspond to any present reality; it exists 
 merely on the canvas on which it was painted, and therefore the de- 
 votion could only be to a picture. On the contrary, the Heart of Jesus 
 always loved, was never anything but love, and continues in perfect 
 harmony with a love that will never end. 
 
The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 25 
 
 in the revelations of Blessed Margaret Mary. We honor the 
 Heart of Christ the better to honor His love, in order to be 
 the more deeply moved by this sensible representation which 
 the wound received on the cross helps to make more ex- 
 pressive. The honor paid to that love constitutes the proxi- 
 mate end of the devotion to the Sacred Heart; and if the real 
 bond with the love of Christ explain and justify it, inasmuch 
 as the heart is its point of termination, the love itself explains 
 and justifies this same devotion inasmuch as the latter termi- 
 nates in Jesus Christ, Who, as we said in the beginning, is 
 its object or primary end. * We especially honor Jesus Christ 
 because He loves, and we honor His Heart because It is the 
 symbol of His love. Thus, if we would return to the primary 
 end, love constitutes the formal object of devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart, and it was this what Pius VI meant when he 
 said : “ Devotion to the Sacred Heart substantially consists 
 in meditating upon and in venerating in the symbolic image 
 of the heart, Our Divine Redeemer’s immense charity and the 
 effusions of His love.”(l) And Father de Gallifet observes: 
 “ Even if the nature of this feast (of the Sacred Heart) 
 be not very attentively considered, it will be understood and 
 felt that, under the title of the Heart of Jesus, it is in reality 
 the feast of the love of Jesus.” (2) Then in the Breviary (3) 
 we read that “ the feast was granted in order that under the 
 symbol of this Most Holy Heart, the faithful might celebrate 
 the love of Christ with more fervor and devotion.” 
 
 However, we must not, as several writers seem to have 
 done, distinguish as two parallel objects of the devotion to 
 the Sacred Heart, the one material or sensible, the other for- 
 mal or spiritual ; and Father Terrien very appropriately re- 
 marks (4) that if there w^ere two separable objects there would 
 be two devotions to the Sacred Heart. On the contrary, the 
 
 (1) Letter to Scipio Ricci, Bishop of Prato-Pistoia. 
 
 (2) New observations for the concession of the Office and the Mass 
 of the Sacred Heart. Observation II quoted by Father Nilles, De 
 Rationibus . . . edit. 5, vol. I, p. 336. 
 
 (3) Lesson VI of the Office. 
 
 (4) La Devotion an Sacre Cccur de Jesus, chap. Ill, p. 34. 
 
2fi The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 formal and the material object of the devotion must simply 
 be the two elements, one material and the other formal, o£ 
 one and the same object and in the present case, thanks to 
 symbolism, they can be so. As Father de Gallifet says: “ The 
 immediate object of the feast is the love which makes the 
 heart burn, the love which, with the heart, forms an indi- 
 visible whole.” (1) 
 
 The heart and the love are one and the same object; either 
 the heart is the real symbol of love, or love is symbolized by 
 the heart. “ Note, then,” says Father J. B. Terrien, “ the 
 proper object of the devotion to the Sacred Heart: it is neither 
 the Heart of flesh to the exclusion of the love, nor the love 
 to the exclusion of the Heart, but Heart and love combined. 
 Whosoever says ‘ Heart of Jesus ’ says both of these things, 
 or, rather, but one thing composed, so to speak, of two in- 
 separable elements joined in the unity of one object, as the 
 body and soul are combined in the substantial unity of one 
 and the same nature. I adore the material Heart of Jesus, 
 but in adoring It I consider It the living symbol which per- 
 sonifies for me all His love; I adore the Love of Jesus, but 
 in adoring It I contemplate It in the natural and sensible 
 manifestation in which Jesus shows It to me in His Heart of 
 Flesh. Love is certainly the principal element, as the acts 
 which go to make up this devotion do not descend from love 
 to the heart, but rise from the heart to love. However, the 
 physical Heart is the sacred auxiliary element which puts that 
 love within the range of my weakness : as it is through the 
 heart that it is revealed to me, that it touches me and that I 
 attain to it.” (2) 
 
 These considerations contain at the same time the answer 
 to this interesting question : Is the worship of the physical 
 Heart of Our Lord essential to the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart? The question is practical only insofar as it deals with 
 
 (1) In the apology offered Benedict XIII, book II, chap. 2, quoted by 
 Nilles, De Rationibus . . . edit. 5, vol. I, p. 340. 
 
 (2) La Devotion au Sacre Coeur de Jesus, chap. IV, p. 37. We 
 quote this author all the more willingly now, as later on we shall have 
 to contradict him. 
 
The Heart of Christ as a Symbol of His Love. 
 
 27 
 
 private devotion. In public worship it is of paramount neces- 
 sity to present the devotion to the Sacred Heart such as it 
 was made known by Blessed Margaret Mary and has been 
 approved by the Church, and the real, living Heart is an in- 
 dispensable element of it. To take It away would be to ad- 
 vance the cause of the enemies of the devotion, to render it 
 less accessible to all under pretext of spiritualizing it ; in fact, 
 it would be almost like replacing Jesus Christ by His Soul. 
 
 If, even in private, we were to conceive a most commendable 
 worship with Our Lord's love as its exclusive object, such a 
 worship would not be of the Sacred Heart. It would, of 
 course, retain the principal element of it and thereby resemble 
 it, but the material element would be lacking. In the same 
 way every devotion to the sufferings of Our Lord is not neces- 
 sarily that of the Five Wounds which symbolize these suffer- 
 ings. Of course, the representation of the physical heart will 
 be more or less vivid in proportion to one's temperament and 
 inclinations, but surely there is none who considers himself 
 so far above the common conditions of humanity as to think 
 that he does not require the help of symbols, above all of those 
 which the Divine Goodness providentially metes out to our 
 present weakness. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Love of Which the Heart of Jesus is the Symbol. 
 
 It was for a purpose that, in the preceding section, we spoke 
 of Christ’s love without defining it, and the reader may have 
 discovered a hiatus. Indeed, perhaps more than once he has 
 wondered to what particular love we referred : whether it was 
 the love of Christ for mankind, the love which He feels in 
 His two natures, or only that emanating from His human 
 nature. Now, by clearing up this doubt, we shall settle the 
 question we had in view when undertaking this work and the 
 importance of which cannot be denied. For the sake of clear- 
 ness we will divide this section into several paragraphs. 
 
28 
 
 Created or Uncreated Love. 
 
 1. The Mystery of the Incarnation. Created and Uncreated 
 
 Love. The Question Considered from This Point of View. 
 
 This first paragraph connects the question with the most 
 consoling mystery of our faith, the mystery of the Incarnate 
 Word. We must scrupulously preserve the Catholic concep- 
 tion of it and, consequently, not depart even in our mode of 
 expression from usages accepted by the Church. And now 
 we shall reflect for a moment upon the principal points of 
 the dogma of the Word made Flesh. 
 
 Decided upon and executed by the entire Trinity, attributed 
 to the Holy Ghost, inasmuch as it is a supreme favor of Divine 
 love,(l) the work of the Incarnation gave human nature to 
 only the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the Word of 
 God called since the Incarnation, Jesus Christ. During the 
 course of centuries a more exact concept of this dogma of 
 love was formed because of the necessity of refuting opposing 
 heresies, but we shall restrict our references to the principal 
 among them. Nestorius (439) destroyed theandric union by 
 distinguishing two personalities in Christ: the human per- 
 sonality, born of the Virgin Mary and the personality of the 
 Word, begotten of the Father from all eternity. Thanks to a 
 union, which was begun at the conception of the Son of Mary 
 and which was to receive from the subsequent merits of the 
 human person thus deified its confirmation and achievement, 
 these two persons were, according to Nestorius, inseparably 
 united, even to forming a single moral person and to making 
 the human person participate in honors peculiar to the Eter- 
 nal Word. Despite a certain excellence, this union savored 
 of the nature of momentary communications with which the 
 Divinity honored the prophets. (2) By a contrary tendency, 
 the Monophysite sects, following the monk Eutyches (454), 
 concluded or inferred from the unity of person a unity of 
 compound nature, which, from the time of the Incarnation 
 
 (1) Saint Thomas’s Summa theologica, part III, q. XXXII, a. 1. 
 
 (2) See Franzelin, De Verbo incarnato, edit. 2, th. 22, especially at 
 the end, p. 182. 
 
Created or Uncreated Love. 2** 
 
 of the Word, constituted the divine and the human nature. (1) 
 This heresy, anathematized by the Council of Chalcedon, 
 which took place twenty years after that of Ephesus (431), at 
 which Nestorius was condemned, reappeared under a new 
 form with the Monothelites. While admitting two essential 
 natures in the Word, these heretics did not understand how 
 human nature could be for Christ what it is for us, the prin- 
 ciple of a whole order of activity. According to them, Christ 
 had in His divine nature the immediate principle of all action, 
 of all submission ; whereas, in operating and in suffering, He 
 made use of His human nature as of an inert instrument 
 destitute of will and energy. (2) In confronting these errors 
 the Church shows herself equally jealous of preserving the 
 unity of person and the distinction of two natures : the divine 
 nature common with all its perfections and all its tendencies 
 to the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and the human 
 nature, body and soul complete, peculiar, with all its opera- 
 tions and tendencies, to the Incarnate Word. In other words, 
 the substantial union of the human nature with God was not 
 made in the divine nature but in the Second Person of the 
 Blessed Trinity, the person identified with that nature. How 
 the union could be accomplished in the person, without being 
 accomplished in a nature identical with that person, is a mys- 
 tery deep as the unfathomable abyss of the mystery of the 
 Blessed Trinity. However, we know and we profess that 
 the personal union excludes all absorption of one nature by 
 the other, as also all confusion, all commingling of the divine 
 and human natures, for from that would result a third nature 
 composed of the two preceding ones. 
 
 Hence, in Jesus Christ there are two natures, two wills, 
 combining harmoniously and subordinate one to the other, 
 but physically and essentially distinct, and of which the dis- 
 tinction as well as the reality must be maintained. Now. ad- 
 mitted that there are two wills, there must also be two loves. 
 In Christ there is eternal, uncreated love identified with the 
 
 (1) Ibid ., th. 21, p. 172. 
 
 (2) Ibid ., th. 40, p. 387. 
 
30 
 
 Created or Uncreated Love. 
 
 Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and a created love, 
 human and sanctified, whereby Christ loves His Father and 
 also loves us. 
 
 Therefore, naturally enough, the question arises: Since by 
 the worship of the Sacred Heart, we especially honor the 
 love of Jesus Christ, which love is it? The love that created 
 the universe or the most sublime of all created loves? The 
 love that created Lazarus or the love that wept over him? 
 
 In other words, as Father Nilles(l) expresses it: the object 
 of the devotion to the Sacred Heart is not a metaphorical 
 heart, nor indeed the real heart taken in itself absolutely, but 
 the heart, as a real symbol of love. Now, of what love is it the 
 symbol in the worship of the Sacred Heart? 
 
 We must remember that the love which Christ bears us in 
 His human nature is not a purely human love; it is divine 
 in consideration of the person ; it is the love of a God, and 
 therefore its dignity and value are infinite. We should call 
 it theandric rather than human, as it is the love of a God in 
 the human nature assumed by Him. 
 
 But we mean to return to these ideas and dwell upon them 
 at greater length. First, in order the better to rid ourselves 
 of all preconceived notions and dispose ourselves to make an 
 impartial examination, we shall review the opinions set forth 
 by different authors or reflected in the decisions of the Holy 
 See. Readers already convinced that the difference of opin- 
 ions on this question gives us entire freedom of thought, and 
 that the ambiguity and confusion of views render an exact 
 and methodical exposition most desirable, may pass over this 
 paragraph and without further delay delve into the very 
 depths of the subject. 
 
 2. Authors? Opinions. 
 
 Preliminary observations. Two remarks will enable us the 
 better to understand the ideas of these authors. 
 
 1. If we attribute to the love of Christ characteristics all of 
 which are suited to His created love (such is even the qualifi- 
 
 (1) Cor Jesu ut caritatis symbolum, p. 9-25. 
 
Preliminary Observations. 
 
 31 
 
 cation “ divine ” given to His love) we equivalently and tacit- 
 ly exclude uncreated love. In fact, (a) the love of a human 
 heart is itself considered human unless the contrary be said 
 of it: ( b ) if uncreated charity be assigned a place, it should 
 be in the first rank. That we should be satisfied with presup- 
 posing what is evidently the principal element is past belief. 
 
 2. The love of Christ to which we owe the Passion and 
 the Eucharist must be the love He bears us in His human 
 nature, (a) It was as man that Christ died for us; it was 
 in consequence of an excellence peculiar to human nature that 
 He instituted the Sacraments and accordingly the Blessed 
 Eucharist. (1) It is only by divine power that the Sacra- 
 ments operate the interior effect of sanctification; but this 
 power and this operation, though common to the Blessed 
 Trinity, are attributed to the Holy Ghost; it would not, there- 
 fore, be very theological to ascribe them to the love of Christ. 
 ( b ) Moreover, by way of confirmation, we can invoke the 
 argument of authority. Lesson VI of the Office recognizes 
 in the Sacred Heart the symbol of the love of Christ suffer- 
 ing and instituting 'the Holy Eucharist. Marques (2) con- 
 cludes that here there is only question of created love. Father 
 de San says that, properly speaking, the Heart of Jesus sym- 
 bolizes created love, especially that which gave us the Passion 
 and the Eucharist. (3) Father Nilles expresses himself still 
 more explicitly : (4) “ Just as Christ as man suffered for us, 
 
 and as such renews in the Eucharist the memory of His Pas- 
 sion, so the Passion and the Eucharist are the principal dem- 
 onstrations of the love He bears us in His human nature ” 
 Among those operations which, in the humanity of Christ, are 
 worthy of adoration, Cardinal Franzelin ranks the love to 
 which the Church is indebted for the spiritual nourishment 
 of the Sacraments. (5) 
 
 Here, then, are different opinions on the subject we are 
 
 (1) Saint Thomas’s Summa theologica, part III, q. XLIV, a. 3. 
 
 (2) Defensio cultus, p. 2, n. 18. 
 
 (3) De Verbo incarnato , c. 21. 
 
 (4) Cor Jesu divini Redemptoris nostri caritatis symbolum, p. 26. 
 
 (5) De Verbo incarnato , p. 467. 
 
32 
 
 Authors’ Opinions. 
 
 discussing, gathered from among authorized representatives 
 of the devotion to the Sacred Heart or of theological science : 
 
 1. In the annals of the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the 
 
 first name to be inscribed after that of Blessed Margaret Mary 
 is that of the spiritual guide sent her by God to acknowledge 
 the divine and supernatural origin of the revelations concern- 
 ing the Sacred Heart. The venerable Father de La Colom- 
 biere, S .J., considers the Divine Heart the “ seat of all virtues, 
 the source of all blessings and the refuge of all holy souls.” 
 He says that the principal virtues to be honored in that Heart 
 are Its respectful, humble love for God the Father, Its pa- 
 tience with and grief for our sins, Its sensible compassion for 
 our misery, Its immense love despite this same misery, and 
 Its absolute equanimity caused by perfect conformity with 
 the divine will. “ The sentiments of this Heart are still the 
 same. . . . For all that, It finds in the hearts of men 
 
 only unkindness, forgetfulness, contempt, ingratitude ; It loves, 
 but is not loved in return. ... In reparation for so many 
 insults ” the holy religious consecrates his own heart and 
 abandons himself entirely to It. ( 1 ) We do not think that 
 Father de La Colombiere expresses himself anywhere more 
 clearly upon the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Now, 
 judged according to these expressions, not only does the Heart 
 Itself belong to the humanity, but all the sentiments acknowl- 
 edged and honored therein are divine sentiments which Our 
 Lord feels in His human nature. 
 
 2. At the earnest solicitation of Blessed Margaret Mary, 
 Father J. Croiset, S.J., explained the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart in a book, of which she said:(2) “ If I mistake not, (3) 
 it is all so perfectly in accord with His (Our Lord’s) desire, 
 that I do not think any of it needs to be changed.” 
 
 Without making a formal statement to that effect. Father 
 Croiset shows most unmistakably that he considers only the 
 
 (1) Spiritual Retreat, Offering to the Sacred Heart at the end. 
 
 (2) Letter to Father Croiset, Aug. 21, 1690. 
 
 (3) We know that Blessed Margaret Mary was under obedience 
 thus to temper her expressions. 
 
Authors' Opinions. 
 
 33 
 
 Saviour’s human heart and created love the special object of 
 devotion to the Sacred Heart. He attributes the excellence of 
 the adorable Heart of Jesus to Its union with the Divine 
 Person and to the virtues with which the Heart is adorned ;(1) 
 and the benefits to which he refers in paragraph 3 of chapter 
 III are those of the Redemption and the institution of the 
 Blessed Eucharist. In the following words he sums up the 
 economy of Christ’s love : “ God has rendered Himself more 
 sensible, so to speak, by becoming man, and this same man 
 has done even what is beyond our power of conception, in 
 order to make men love Him. . . . Such, then, are the 
 
 effects of the love of Jesus for us.” Finally, the first lines 
 of the work thus define the particular object of the devotion : 
 “ It was the immense love of the Son of God which led Him 
 to deliver Himself up to death for us and to give Himself 
 entirely to us in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar, and 
 even the sight of all the ingratitude and all the insults which 
 He was to receive as a Victim immolated to the end of time 
 did not deter Him from working this miracle.” (2) 
 
 3. Father Froment, S.J., the contemporary of Father 
 Croiset, composed at the same time as the latter a treatise on 
 The True Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Only the 
 date of its appearance induces us to quote from a work which 
 met with scarcely any success. Father Sommervogel(3) 
 mentions but one edition of it. and the treatise, fallen into 
 oblivion, had become very rare, when it was reprinted in the 
 Petite Bibliothcquc chretienne.(4i) From the beginning, the 
 author considers the Heart of Jesus in its very broadest ac- 
 
 (1) Part I, chap. Ill, sec. 1. 
 
 (2) We quote the edition of Father de Franciosi, Montreuil, 1895. 
 The omission of certain formalities caused Father Croiset’s book to 
 be put on the Index, March 11, 1704. It was withdrawn August 24, 1887, 
 thanks to the urgent measures taken by Mgr. Stadler, Archbishop of 
 Vrhbosine. At the head of his edition Father de Franciosi inserted 
 a dedicatory epistle in which these measures are brought to light. 
 
 (3) Bibliothcquc dcs ccrivains de la Compagnie de Jesus. 
 
 (4) Brussels, Vromant, 1891. The simultaneous composition of the 
 treatises of Fathers Froment and Croiset was the occasion of some 
 embarrassmment to Blessed Margaret Mary, as may be seen from her 
 letter of February 18, 1690, to Father Croiset, quoted by Letierce in 
 Etude sur le Sacre Cceur, vol. II, p. 27. 
 
34 
 
 Authors' Opinions. 
 
 ceptation : “ The Heart of Jesus may be regarded in different 
 ways, namely, not merely as the Heart of Flesh , which con- 
 stitutes a part of the adorable Body of the Son of God, but 
 also as the will, divine as well as human, of this God-Man, 
 which will has always loved us with an ardent love; and lastly, 
 as this same love. In all these different ways the Heart of 
 Jesus is considered throughout this w’ork, which is to say 
 that It is looked upon as the seat of that excessive love which 
 led Him to deliver Himself unto death for us and to give Him- 
 self to us till the end of time in the Blessed Sacrament, the 
 masterpiece of His Divine Heart and the consummation of 
 His love for men who treat Him with naught save coldness 
 and indifference/’ These lines seem to us somewhat con- 
 fused, and in his development the author is losing sight of 
 uncreated love. 
 
 4 . Perhaps no one worked more efficaciously for the appro- 
 bation of the public worship of the Sacred Heart than the cele- 
 brated Father de Gallifet, S.J., a disciple of Father de La 
 Colombiere, and restored to health after a vow made by 
 Father Croiset. The entreaties which finally won the ap- 
 proval of the Holy See either came from him or were inspired 
 by his writings, and his work on The Excellence of the Devo- 
 tion to the Sacred Heart was soon “ considered the manual 
 par excellence of the devotion.” ( 1) Few authorities can be 
 compared with him. Now, from his book and his defense it 
 appears clearly that he considers the created love of Christ 
 the special (spiritual) (2) object of the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart. He explains the entire worship of the Sacred Heart 
 by the hypostatic union of the Heart of Jesus with the Person 
 of the Word and a love of which this Heart must have felt 
 the impressions. “ As the love,” he says, “ with which the 
 Lord Jesus as man has loved God the Father and men them- 
 selves, was conceived according to the manner peculiar to 
 human nature, it follows that to the intense spiritual love of 
 
 (1) Letierce, op. cit., p. 153. 
 
 (2) In fact he distinguishes between a sensible object , the heart and a 
 spiritual object formed by love. 
 
Authors' Opinions. 
 
 35 
 
 the Soul of Christ, there should be a corresponding sensible, 
 proportionate love in the Heart/’ (1) He then exalts the 
 Heart of Jesus by beholding in It a noble part of the body ; 
 he observes the relations of that Heart with the affections 
 of the soul, Its union with the Divine Person, the love with 
 which It burns for God, the sanctity of the Word, in which 
 It participates, the gifts which the Holy Ghost has bestowed 
 upon It, and the glory that It gives to God. And as regards 
 man, he adds, this Heart is that of their Redeemer. (2) 
 
 5. Cardinal Gerdil(3) frequently repeats that the Heart 
 of Jesus Christ is taken as the symbol of Christ’s immense 
 love , but he does not state whether this love is created or un- 
 created. His silence leads us to believe that he thought only 
 of the sentiments of human nature, the more so, as he gives 
 for a reason, in favor of the worship, that Christ Himself 
 sanctioned our attributing to the heart the affections and 
 sentiments of the soul. 
 
 6. Benoit Tetamo, S.J., wrote his Dissertation apologetiqne 
 sur le culte dn Sacre Ccenr in 1772. In the Appendix I, chap- 
 ter 1, he acknowledges that the Heart of Jesus symbolizes both 
 uncreated and created love. A decree of the Sacred Congre- 
 gation of Rites, in 1765, to which we will refer later, would 
 seem to have inspired his opinion. At the close of chapter 2, 
 he declares that it would be no more difficult for a heart of 
 flesh to symbolize uncreated love than for the word heart to 
 express the love of God. 
 
 7. A little later, in 1781, Emmanuel Marques, a member 
 of the suppressed Society, published his celebrated work, 
 Defensio cultus Sacratissimi Cordis Jesn.( 4) He deals very 
 explicitly with the question that interests us, and here is the 
 gist of his reply, (a) The worship and the feast of the Sacred 
 
 (1) De cultu . . . , book I, chap. 1. 
 
 (2) Ibid., book II. chap. I. It is as man and not in His divine 
 nature that Christ is Mediator and Redeemer. St. Paul’s First Epistle 
 to Timothy, II, 5. See Franzelin’s De Verbo incarnato, th. 46, p. 497. 
 
 (3) Animadversiones in notas Cl. Feller de nonnullis propositionibus 
 damnatis Pistoriensis synodi. Animadversio 2; et nota ex animadvcr- 
 sione. Opera, vol. XIV, pp. 348 and 374. Romae, 1809. 
 
 (4) Defensio cultus SS. Cordis Jesu, pars. 2, propositio la, n. 15-19. 
 
36 
 
 Authors' Opinions. 
 
 Heart formally refer to Christ’s love of mankind, not to His 
 love of God. ( b ) This love is, strictly speaking, created love, 
 especially that which the Saviour manifested for us in His 
 Passion and in the Eucharist. In reality the Heart of Jesus 
 has not the affinity and analogy with uncreated love upon 
 which its symbolism is founded, and in the Office of the feast, 
 the Church expressly declares that the love of our suffering 
 Saviour is honored by renewing in the Holy Eucharist the 
 memory of His death. The prayer of the feast recalls the 
 same benefits. Indeed the entire Office, as is shown by the 
 responses after the lessons, is divided between these two mys- 
 teries of love, (c) However, the admirable conformity of the 
 human will of Christ with the divine will reveals to us in the 
 created love of Christ a perfect imitation of the uncreated 
 love. Consequently the symbol of the one becomes, in a meas- 
 ure, the symbol of the other; and uncreated love may be un- 
 derstood in a broad sense in the worship of the Sacred Heart. 
 In support of this opinion Marques refers to the decree of 
 1765, from which we have already quoted, and which reads 
 thus : “ By the celebration of the Office and of the Mass, we 
 symbolically renew the memory of this divine love by which 
 the only Son of God assumed human nature.” “ Behold,” 
 says Marques, “ uncreated love.” The decree adds : “ And 
 (through love) becoming obedient even unto death, (the Son 
 of God) declared that He gave Himself to men as an example 
 of meekness and humility of heart.” “ Behold,” resumes Mar- 
 ques, “ created love.” 
 
 8. According to the celebrated Frangois-Antoine Zaccaria, 
 S.J., the worship of the Sacred Heart is indeed that of the 
 humanity of the Word ; the Heart of Christ does not in any 
 way participate in uncreated love, but only in created love, 
 and the object of the feast could not be a purely symbolical 
 heart ; it is the real Heart of the Saviour, united to the hu- 
 manity and to the Person of the Word and symbol of love.(l) 
 
 (l) Antidoto contra i libri prodotti o da prodursi dal sign. Blasi 
 intorno alia divozione al S. Cuore di Gesu., p. 20, 21, 33, 61 et n. 
 16, p. 108. Florence, 1773. 
 
Authors' Opinions. 
 
 37 
 
 Therefore, Zaccaria seems to limit the special object of the 
 devotion to the Sacred Heart to created love. 
 
 9. The works of the learned and pious Muzzarelli (1768- 
 1813) always bear the stamp of rich erudition and unques- 
 tionable orthodoxy, but it does not seem to us that his disserta- 
 tion on the rules for speaking and writing with precision on 
 the devotion and worship due to the Sacred Heart furnish the 
 clear and accurate ideas which it was his intention to convey, 
 and which his talent would have led us to expect. Deviating 
 from the ordinary (1) language which he thinks he uses, Muz- 
 zarelli makes Jesus Christ Himself the material, real and 
 proper object of the feast and of the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart. The heart is the formal object, that which gives rise 
 to the worship. The heart can be taken either in the proper 
 sense, namely, as the heart of flesh, the victim of love, in which 
 event it cannot receive appellations of a divine nature, (2) 
 or in a symbolical or metaphorical (3) sense, which may be 
 applied to the created or uncreated will, to created or un- 
 created love. The Church has varied her expressions, thereby 
 proving her intention to associate the two concepts. It is in 
 the formula inserted in the preface that Muzzarelli expresses 
 himself the most clearly. “ The material, proper, immediate 
 and direct object of the feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus is 
 Jesus Christ Himself, and this feast is occasioned or given 
 rise to by the memory of His immense love represented under 
 the symbol of His Sacred Heart or the Heart a victim of love.” 
 
 10. Without formally discussing the question, Father 
 Roothaan transmits his ideas on the worship of the Sacred 
 Heart of Jesus in a letter addressed to the Society of which 
 he was the Father General. In this worship, he says, the 
 faithful celebrate the benefits conferred by a loving Saviour, 
 namely, His Passion, death and the institution of the Holy 
 
 (1) Fr. Letierce acknowledges it, op. cit., vol. II, p. 440 note. 
 
 (2) He acknowledges, however (p. 16), that the expression, “The 
 Heart of Jesus has loved us with an infinite love,” may mean His 
 created love which is of infinite dignity. — We quote from the French, 
 Avignon edition 1826, because we have not the Italian edition at hand. 
 
 (3) We will continue to insist that these two expressions are not 
 synonymous. (See above, section IV.) 
 
38 
 
 Authors' Opinions. 
 
 Eucharist, and take upon themselves reparation for the insults 
 of which He is the object, principally in this mystery of love. 
 The love of the Sacred Heart is that “ which led Jesus Christ 
 to sacrifice Himself during His entire life, even from His 
 conception, especially in His Passion and death and in the 
 Holy Eucharist, where He continues to be our Victim. ”(1) 
 
 11. Father Gautrelet, S.J., having clearly stated that the 
 Heart of Our Lord represents and completely embodies His 
 sacred humanity, seems reasonably to conclude from the hypo- 
 static union of the Heart with the Person, that we find therein 
 Jesus Christ entire, and hence also the love of the divine na- 
 ture. He, however, specifies nothing more. (2) 
 
 12. Whoever reads attentively the pages which the learned 
 C. Franzelin, S.J., in his treatise De Verbo incarnato,(3 ) 
 devotes to the adoration of the humanity of Christ and espe- 
 cially of His Sacred Heart, will be readily convinced that, ac- 
 cording to this author, the special object of worship is the 
 love of Christ in His human nature. Not only is there not a 
 word to indicate that the Heart of Our Lord is also the symbol 
 of a love adorable in itself and by itself, but moreover, (4) 
 (a) he likens the worship of the Sacred Heart to the worship 
 of the mysteries of the Incarnate Word : “ In all these mys- 
 teries the complete object of worship is the Word, acting and 
 suffering in His humanity.” ( b ) He draws a parallel between 
 the worship of the Sacred Heart and that of the Five Wounds, 
 the latter worship corresponding, as it were, to the exterior 
 life and passion of the Incarnate Word and the former to His 
 interior life and passion. ( c ) The heart is considered as mani- 
 festing the theandric affections and as the symbol of the love 
 and of all the interior life of the Redeemer, the God-Man. 
 Now, it is in His human nature that Our Lord is Restorer 
 and Redeemer. 
 
 13. Father de San, in his manuscript (5) treatise, and Father 
 
 (1) Litterce de cultu SS. Cordis Jesu, pp. 8, 13. Anvers, 1848. 
 
 (2) Manuel de la devotion au Sacre Cceur, art. 2. 
 
 (3) We quote from the second edition, Rome, 1874. 
 
 (4) P. 468, III.— 5 P. 461. 
 
 (5) De Verbo incarnato , chap. XXI. 
 
Authors' Opinions. 
 
 39 
 
 Nilles(l) adopt the opinion of Marques. In a strict sense the 
 Heart of Jesus symbolizes only created love; in a broader 
 sense it symbolizes uncreated love also. Father Nix, in his 
 Cultus SS. Cordis Jesn, does not differ notably from these 
 other authors when he makes created love the proximate and 
 immediate object of worship and uncreated love its ultimate 
 object. (2) 
 
 14. In his great work De SS. Corde Jesu, ejusque cultu, 
 Canon Leroy makes the divine and the human love of Christ 
 the object of the worship of the Sacred Heart. (3) 
 
 15. Father Bucceroni, S.J., in his Commentarii in cultum 
 SS. Cordis Jesu , agrees with Muzzarelli. He, too, distin- 
 guishes between the heart taken in the proper and the meta- 
 phorical sense, and as it may symbolize both created and un- 
 created love, it is therefore the formal object of the devotion 
 to the Sacred Heart. (4) 
 
 16. In his beautiful work, The Devotion to the Heart of 
 Jesus, (5) Father Bernard Dalgairns, the English Oratorian, 
 alludes merely to created love. 
 
 17. According to Father Chevalier, founder of the Mission- 
 aries of the Sacred Heart, and several late writers, the scope 
 of the devotion is indefinitely extended. They behold the 
 Heart of Jesus in the Word by Whom all things were made; 
 and the foundation of the devotion must therefore have been 
 co-incident with the creation of the world. (6) 
 
 18. “ In the Incarnate Word/’ says Father Billot, “ the 
 Heart is at once the symbol of uncreated love which caused 
 the Word to descend upon earth, and of created love which, 
 bursting forth from the first instant, led Him even unto the 
 cross.” (7) 
 
 (1) Cor Jesu, divini Redemptoris Nostri caritatis symbolum. Inns- 
 bruck, 1872. He here expresses his opinion on the present question 
 more clearly than in his large work. 
 
 (2) P. 40. 
 
 (3) See n. 175. He similarly expresses himself in his Litany of the 
 Sacred Heart. 
 
 (4) See pp. 11, 12, 21, 22. 
 
 (5) See chapters II and III especially. 
 
 (6) Lc Sacre Coeur de Jesus, Paris, 1886. 
 
 (7) De Verbo incarnato, th. 36, p. 332. 
 
40 
 
 Authors' Opinions. 
 
 19. In developing their theses on the worship of the Sacred 
 Heart, (1) Fathers A. Martorell and Joseph Castella, S.J., 
 admit that this worship includes both uncreated and created 
 love, although the latter is more strictly its object. 
 
 20. Father J. B. Terrien, S.J., is credited with a very.clear 
 
 exposition of the question and gives, categorically, the widest 
 range to the object. “ The answer,” he says, “ cannot be 
 doubtful. . . . Who would permit us, when meditating 
 
 on the love of Christ, to parcel out that love, as it were, and 
 to separate what has been joined in such divine harmony? 
 How could I behold in my Saviour at the tomb of His friend 
 Lazarus, the love of a God Who is absolute Master of death 
 and the love at once spiritual and sensible, of a man who con- 
 soles Martha and Mary, and is moved even to tears, and then 
 deliberately make a choice among these manifestations of love, 
 accepting some and rejecting others, instead of adoring and 
 loving the Lord Jesus in the unity of His multiple love?” 
 What God hath joined together let no man put asunder,” He 
 tells us in His Gospel. Elsewhere Father -Terrien says that 
 we should not totally exclude from this worship the love of 
 Our Lord for His Father. (2) 
 
 Notwithstanding our respect for the knowledge and piety 
 of a writer so worthy in the sight of the Sacred Heart and 
 the Blessed Virgin, (3) we cannot but feel that the energy of 
 his statement far outweighs the value of the proofs furnished. 
 There is no question of parceling out love, but of better safe- 
 guarding a distinction which Our Lord inculcates even in the 
 very place to which Father Terrien refers. To whom does 
 Jesus attribute the operation and consequently the love of the 
 Divinity? Is it not to the Father Whom He thanks for having 
 heard His prayer? (4) There is no question of disturbing 
 the harmony between the two loves, but rather of preserving 
 
 (1) Theses de cultu SS. Cordis Jesn. 
 
 (2) La Devotion an Sacre Cceur de Jesus, pp. 80, 81, 86, 87. 
 
 (3) Cf. the well known work; La Mere de Dieu et la Mere des 
 hommes. 
 
 (4) Gospel according to St. John XI, 14. 
 
Authors' Opinions. 
 
 41 
 
 their order of subordination by ascending gradually from the 
 created to the uncreated love. And here the suggestion is in 
 place : “ Those things which God hath distinguished let no 
 
 man confound.” (1) 
 
 21. Answering our question, the Abbe Baruteil, in his re- 
 cent volume Genese da culte da Sacre Coeur de Jesus, ( 2) ex- 
 presses himself thus: “ By the love of Jesus, which is honored 
 as the object of this devotion, we must understand the love 
 of the Son of God for His Father and for mankind, before 
 as well as after His Incarnation, but in a certain order which 
 should be accurately defined.” (3) And farther on he ac- 
 knowledges that “ the principal object of the worship of the 
 Sacred Heart is Its love for us both as God and as man.” 
 
 22. Still more recently, the Messenger of the Sacred Heart 
 reproduced (4) articles published by Father Thill in the Theo- 
 logische Quartalschrift of Linz , under the title of The Heart 
 in the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. After a very scholarly 
 exposition of the meanings of the word Heart, and explanations 
 concentrating all attention upon the humanity of Jesus Christ, 
 the learned writer formulates this assertion : “ This love of 
 the Man-God is at the same time human and divine, and, as 
 
 (1) The author is mistaken in regard to both the value and the mean- 
 ing of the Acts of the Holy See, of which, p. 81, he invokes the 
 authority as incontestable. Indeed he can only quote one stanza of 
 the hymn of Lauds and the decree of 1765. In spite of the fact that 
 the authority of a poetic expression can never rank above the clear 
 the exact formula of the 6th Lesson of the same Office, and that 
 the decree of 1765 has been withdrawn from the collection of authentic 
 decrees, both one and the other document attributes to divine love 
 the Incarnation only. Why, we shall state in our conclusions later on. 
 It is true that, on p. 82, may be found the answer of the Congregation 
 of Rites, but this answer is in reality only one of the preambles that 
 the Secretary of the Congregation claims to have been looked into by 
 the Sacred Congregation before solving the doubts inserted in a re- 
 script of April 3, 1821, and silently passed over in the authentic Decrees. 
 In the non-authentic edition, this decree bore the number 4579 and the 
 Secretary’s account was in a note. However, this account also referred 
 to the decree of 1765 and attributed to the Heart of Jesus only the 
 Incarnation, the institution of the Blessed Sacrament and the sacrifice 
 of the Cross. (See later on our remarks on the decree of 1765.) 
 
 (2) Paris, 1904. 
 
 (3) P. 152.— 3, P. 154. 
 
 (4) June, 1905, etc. 
 
42 
 
 Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 such, is eternal, sovereignly wise, all-powerful and infinitely 
 
 merciful.” (1) 
 
 We think it useless further to multiply quotations. There 
 is ample testimony in favor of the cause we wish to defend, 
 and what we said at the beginning of the paragraph is hence- 
 forth established : the variety of opinions leaves room for 
 serious discussion, and the vagueness of statements makes us 
 wish for greater precision. We shall now consult the Acts 
 of the Holy See. 
 
 3. Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 1. In the first place we shall quote from the Memorial pre- 
 sented by the bishops of Poland and the Roman Archconfra- 
 ternity to the Congregation of Rites. Although not emanating 
 from the Holy See, this document nevertheless clearly ex- 
 presses its views; in fact, the decree of January 26, 1765, 
 rendered by the Congregation of Rites, simply declares its 
 assent to the petition of the bishops and the Archconfraternity, 
 without making therein a single correction. Since that time 
 “ it is manifest that the different questions on the nature , ob- 
 ject and end of the worship of the Heart of Jesus, such as it 
 is approved by the Church, could not be discussed without 
 considering the doctrine of the Memorial” ( 2) 
 
 Now, this Memorial is constantly referring to Father de 
 Gallifet, and, like him, the signers declare that Christ is the 
 primary object of the devotion, that its secondary object is 
 the Heart, and that this Heart must be considered as inflamed 
 with love for men and deeply injured by their ingratitude. 
 It is inflamed with love because the love with which Christ 
 Jesus loved His Father and mankind was conceived in a human 
 
 (1) P. 355. It were useless to state that this expression cannot be 
 taken literally. It would be evidently contrary to the author’s idea 
 to acknowledge in Christ a love really human, at the same time as 
 divine. The two loves belonging to the same Christ cannot be 
 blended into one. Their unity can be but objective; it results from 
 a perfect agreement which shows us above the created will, an uncreated 
 will tending toward the same end. 
 
 (2) Nilles, 'De Rationibus ... 5, vol. I, chap. Ill, p. 153. 
 
Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 43 
 
 way : hence there was in the heart a sensible love correspond- 
 ing to the spiritual love residing in the soul.(l) 
 
 The last Memorial, presented under Benedict XIII and pub- 
 lished by Father Nilles, is couched in the same language. 
 Wherefore a special devotion to the Sacred Heart? Because 
 of the affections of that Heart; because, to the exclusion of 
 all other parts, that part of the humanity experienced the 
 strongest impressions of love, sorrow, contrition and com- 
 passion ; “the immense love of Our Lord Jesus Christ is not 
 only therein contained and represented, but, as it were, in- 
 scribed and sculptured.” (2) All this is Christ’s love in His 
 humanity. 
 
 2. In the Office approved for the entire Church, Clement 
 XIII and the Congregation of Rites indicate as the object of 
 the feast the love which led Christ to die for us and to insti- 
 tute in our behalf the Holy Sacrament of the Altar. 
 
 3. Pius VI similarly expresses himself in a letter to the 
 
 Bishop of Pistoja on June 29. “ The substance of the devo- 
 
 tion to the Sacred Heart consists in meditating upon and 
 venerating, in the Heart as a symbolic image, the immense 
 charity, the loving prodigality of Our Divine Redeemer.” (3) 
 These words, taken in their proper sense, point out to us as 
 the formal and special object of worship, the love which Our 
 Lord bears us as Redeemer. What St. Augustine said of 
 mediation (4) holds good for the Redemption: Christ is Re- 
 deemer in His human nature, not in His divine nature. His 
 human nature, then, is the seat of this love. 
 
 4. Two concessions of the feast given by Pius VII indicate 
 the same object as does the invitatory in the Office: “Let 
 us adore Christ Who has suffered for us.” “ We have heark- 
 ened,” said the Pope, “ to the wishes of the faithful who de- 
 sired to see the worship of the Heart of Jesus amplified, to 
 
 (1) See, for instance, Nos. 27, 34, 37, 38 in Nilles’ De Rationibus 
 
 . . . 5, pp. 113, 120. 
 
 (2) Nilles, De Rationibus ... 5, pp. 74-76. 
 
 (3) Nilles, De Rationibus . . . . o. 334, note, or p. 344. 
 
 (4) “Non quia Deus, sed quia homo.” Enarrationes in Ps. 103, n. 8. 
 (Migne, P. L., vol. XXXVI, col. 1383.) 
 
44 
 
 Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 celebrate with greater fervor the excessive charity of Our 
 Lord Jesus Christ suffering and dying for the redemption of 
 mankind.” (1) 
 
 5. In the decree of August 23, 1853, in which he gave to 
 the entire Church the feast of the Sacred Heart, and also in 
 the brief of the beatification of Blessed Margaret Mary, 
 Pius IX considers the worship of the Sacred Heart that of 
 the immense charity of the Heart of Jesus . . . the means 
 of enkindling in men the flame of love with which the Heart 
 of Jesus burns ; it is the worship of the Heart burning with 
 love for mankind ; it is the worship of the Heart, seat of 
 divine charity.” (2) The love of which the Heart is the seat, 
 with which It is inflamed and which It desires to communi- 
 cate, is the love conceived in the human nature. 
 
 6. Most of the Fathers of the Vatican Council , in their 
 petition for the elevation of the rite of the feast, defined the 
 object of the devotion as the love of Christ under the symbol 
 of His Heart. They recall that the Pope created “ a new 
 legion of apostles, those men who unite their prayers to the 
 prayers of the Heart of Jesus, always living to make inter- 
 cession in our behalf. (3) 
 
 7. We have purposely reserved, as worthy of the closest 
 examination, the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 
 contemporary with the approbation of the Office, by which 
 on February 6, 1765, the Holy See proclaimed: the “Mass 
 and Office tend to symbolically renew the divine love, under 
 the impulse of which the only Son of God assumed human 
 nature and, becoming obedient even unto death, declared that 
 He thereby gave mankind an example of the meekness of His 
 Heart.” 
 
 First of all, let us observe that this decree, inserted in the 
 preceding editions, was taken out of the official collection of 
 the decisions of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and that 
 its suppression prevents us from depending too much upon it. 
 
 (1) Nilles, De Rationibus . . . 5, p. 345. 
 
 (2) Ibid., pp. 346, 347. 
 
 (3) Nilles, 'Dc Rationibus . . . , p. 190. 
 
Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 45 
 
 In fact the committee on revision adopted as a rule the re- 
 jection of useless and contradictory decrees: deeming useless, 
 those repeated to satiety and contradictory, such as conflicted 
 with other decrees or certain prescriptions of law or liturgy. (1) 
 Consequently, were the discussion of this decree to incon- 
 venience us in any way, we would not need to consider it ; 
 but at this stage of our work it behooves us to explain its 
 meaning. 
 
 Its text, strictly understood, leads Marques and several 
 others (2) to conclude that the love therein mentioned is a 
 divine love common to the Trinity, and a human love peculiar 
 to Christ. The obedience even unto death, the meekness and 
 humility of heart, bespeak a created love, and as the love that 
 caused the Incarnation necessarily preceded this created love, 
 it would seem identified with the divine nature. We are not 
 at all reluctant to subscribe to this interpretation. 
 
 Is it, however, the only interpretation of which the text is 
 susceptible? We shall see. In the mystery of our redemp- 
 tion, God wished to emphasize the tenderness as well as the 
 power of His providence. Theology teaches us that He 
 deigned to make our salvation depend upon the Incarnate 
 Word’s voluntary acceptance of His mission and death. 
 Moreover, from the very beginning of His earthly existence, 
 Christ had the full use of reason and, according to St. Paul, (3) 
 it was at His entrance into the world that . He accepted the 
 immolation of His entire life conformably to the will of His 
 Father. “ Behold, O Father, I come to do Thy Will.” Be- 
 hold I come, not by the effect of my human will but accepting, 
 in that will, my Incarnation, just as in the Garden of Olives, 
 that' will shall accept my sufferings, thus directing my hu- 
 manity toward the salvation of men. To this concomitant will 
 
 (1) Introduction, p. 14. The Sacred Congregation is at present 
 being questioned as to the motives of this rejection, but we do not 
 know whether it will see fit to explain. 
 
 (2) Especially the Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of Rites 
 in his second observation. But this observation is already charged 
 with error on another ground. See Nilles’ De Rationibus . . . , pp. 
 163, 164, note. 
 
 (3) Hebr. y X, 5-10. 
 
Decrees of the Holy See. 
 
 46 
 
 the Incarnation itself may be ascribed. By an anticipation 
 all the more natural here as the Person of Christ is eternal, 
 we refer to a moment prior to the Incarnation a love which 
 is really concomitant and logically subsequent. We are surely 
 familiar with the much-used allegory that represents the Word 
 as offering Himself to His Father for the salvation of hu- 
 manity ; and is not the truth which corresponds to this picture 
 entirely in the human will of the Saviour? Is it not simply 
 another way of presenting the passage in the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews? 
 
 The following considerations militate in favor of this ex- 
 planation in such perfect accord with the passage in the Epis- 
 tle. The text of the decree, if we will re-read it, makes the 
 Incarnation and the examples of meekness and humility de- 
 pend upon an impulse of love ( amorem quo). Now this lan- 
 guage is not only indefinite, but even inaccurate if, in the first 
 place, love is uncreated, and in the second, created. In fact, 
 the love of the divine nature is different from the love of the 
 human nature; it is even exterior to this nature. Indeed, such 
 language used by the Church might well cause surprise, see- 
 ing that she is interested in distinguishing between the two 
 loves as carefully as she distinguishes between the natures 
 and wills. Besides, the decree would interpose a love of which 
 there is no trace in the lessons of the Office approved just at 
 that time, and the eternal, infinite love would necessarily be- 
 come the principal element. The learned writer Frangois 
 Antoine Zaccaria, S.J., comments on the common decree, and 
 implies that in this passage there is no such question of un- 
 created but only of created love. 
 
 This second interpretation of the decision of 1765 is, there- 
 fore, not only the more plausible, but even more probable. 
 Does it, however, correspond with the opinion of the Sacred 
 Congregation ? Let us compare the decree with the Epistle to 
 the Philippians (II, 6-8) : “Who being in the form (nature) 
 of God, thought it not robbery, to be himself equal to God: 
 but debased himself, taking the form (nature) of a servant, 
 
In the Light of Sacred Scripture. 
 
 47 
 
 being made to the likeness of men and in shape found as a 
 man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, 
 even the death of the cross.” Does not the decree recall these 
 last two phrases when it alludes to the divine love which led 
 the only Son of God to become man and be obedient even unto 
 death? And does it not again revert to St. Paul’s views when 
 it adds the Gospel passage of St. Matthew, (1) in which Our 
 Lord makes Himself an example of meekness and humility ?(2) 
 In fact, in the 5th verse of the same chapter of the letter to 
 the Philippians, the Apostle had exhorted the Christians to 
 be of the same mind as Christ Jesus. Hence, it is certainly 
 the Apostle who inspired the Sacred Congregation, and from 
 this comparison we may conclude that, without directly ex- 
 plaining their opinion, the authors of the decree of 1765 
 wished simply to invest their words with the same meaning 
 which those of St. Paul had. 
 
 It is true that St. Paul’s words are open to controversial 
 attack, but we think that they may be thus explained. 
 
 In the 6th verse St. Paul enunciates a permanent fact, 
 Christ’s possession of the divine nature, which fact is an in- 
 violable claim to equality with God in honor and glory. To 
 this dignity and this prerogative he opposes Christ’s attitude 
 on two occasions, when He forgets Himself in favor of us. 
 (a) He divests Himself, so to speak, of the divine nature in 
 assuming human nature, so as to be in all things like to other 
 men; ( b ) in this nature He humbles Himself even to the 
 death of the cross. In this second instance Christ forgets 
 Himself in His human nature. Then why not, in the sense 
 heretofore explained, also attribute the first instance of self- 
 forgetfulness to human nature since, in the second Epistle to 
 the Corinthians (VIII, 9), we are reminded that being rich, 
 He became poor for our sakes : that through His poverty we 
 might be rich ; and since logic and the parallelism of the 
 passage quoted from the Epistle to the Hebrews (X, 5-10) in- 
 
 (1) Matt., XI, 29. 
 
 (2) The literal sense of the text is: “Come and ascertain by experi- 
 ence the meekness and humility of My Heart.” 
 
48 Theological Examination of the Question. 
 
 vite us to do so. If such be the meaning of the verses of St. 
 Paul, such is, at least implicitly, the idea of the authors of the 
 decree of 1765; and since then there has been no other official 
 document immediately proposing the love of the divine nature 
 as the object of the devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 4. Theological Examination of the Question. 
 
 In accordance with our programme we shall go to the very 
 bottom of the question which now absorbs us and which may 
 be accurately stated in this way: The direct, immediate ob- 
 ject of the devotion to the Sacred Heart, is the living Heart 
 of Jesus Christ, inasmuch as It is the symbol of His love. 
 Is this love created love , uncreated love, or both? 
 
 However, before going farther it would seem only fitting 
 here to record the results of our little investigation and to 
 sum up the impressions made by reading the documents of the 
 Holy See, the revelations made to Blessed Margaret Mary and 
 the writings of approved authors. Thus we shall be directly 
 applying the principles set forth in part first on the sources 
 to be consulted. Needless to say, these principles will not be 
 lost to view T in our reasoning. 
 
 1. The documents of the Holy See are silent on the subject 
 of Our Lord’s uncreated love and His love for His Father, if 
 we except one which is of doubtful authority and question- 
 able meaning. (1) Besides it discusses only the divine love 
 that caused the Incarnation. See the conclusive proof hereto- 
 fore given. 
 
 2. In the great revelations made to Blessed Margaret Mary 
 the love mentioned always seems that of a real heart ; the mani- 
 festations which Our Lord there recalls and shows, so to 
 speak, as engraven upon His Heart, are the Passion and the 
 
 (l) Pere Terrien also refers to the hymn of Lauds which seems so 
 effectively to recall the Incarnation ^nd the Passion. We do not need 
 to contradict, the more especially as we can freely accept the conclusion 
 deduced from it. (See our conclusions.) But, as we have previously 
 observed, it is clear that stanzas confined within a certain meter could 
 never be set up against the exact teaching contained in the lessons 
 of the Office. 
 
Theological Examination of the Question. 49 
 
 Eucharist, and the love is at once intense and profoundly sor- 
 rowful. A human heart can love with created love only. “ It 
 was as man that Christ suffered for us ; and as such He re- 
 news the memory of His Passion.” (1) The Passion and the 
 Eucharist prove to us the love which Christ manifests for us 
 in His Human Nature. Only this love could really have been 
 sorrowful. Is it not therefore natural to conclude that created 
 love is the proper object of the devotion? 
 
 3. Authors are divided in their opinions. From the begin- 
 ning some among them, and indeed the most celebrated, like 
 Peres Croiset and de Gallifet, seemed to consider only created 
 love ; several acknowledge only uncreated love, though in a 
 broad sense, while a few put both loves o.. in equality. 
 
 Let us then, by dint of reasoning, endeavor to reach clearer 
 and more decisive conclusions. 
 
 To proceed as clearly as possible, we shall lead up to 
 these conclusions by developing a series of special points, the 
 first of which will not only enable us the better to grasp the 
 truth, but will render it easier of acceptance by obviating cer- 
 tain mistakes which would detract from the sublimity of a 
 devotion presented to us in so very rational and accessible 
 a way. 
 
 A. In What Sense Uncreated Love is Necessarily Under- 
 stood in the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 1. Infinite and in Himself worthy of all love, God mani- 
 fests to us His amiability and His perfections in effects which 
 excite us to adore and love Him. When these effects — works 
 or creatures — are foreign to all personality they receive no 
 absolute honor, are not of themselves worthy of any worship 
 or devotion, but they impel us to give homage to God, to His 
 infinite perfections, especially to His goodness, and His love. 
 If these effects constitute a created person, or something per- 
 taining to a person divine or created, they do not cease to 
 impel us to love God, His goodness, His love, but moreover, 
 they are themselves a direct object of worship and of love: 
 
 (1) Martorelli and Castelle, Theses No. 115, 
 
50 
 
 Meaning of Uncreated Love. 
 
 of a lesser worship and love if the person be inferior to God ; 
 of an identical worship when the perfection, although perhaps 
 finite in essence, is nevertheless interior to a divine person. 
 Hence God, the Blessed Trinity and uncreated love, could not 
 be foreign to the worship of the Sacred Heart : the entire 
 Humanity of Christ, His operations, sufferings and also His 
 love, cause God to be loved and uncreated love to be glorified. 
 This uncreated love is the final object of the devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart. 
 
 2. Moreover, at the beginning of this study, we found that 
 the complete object of a worship is always the person. By 
 devotion to the Sacred Heart we honor Jesus Christ, adorable 
 in all that belongs to Him, adorable because of His Divine 
 Nature. Again in this sense His Divinity, and consequently 
 His uncreated love, receive our homage. 
 
 In honoring the Heart of Jesus as the symbol of created 
 love only, we do not deny the uncreated love common to the 
 Word with the Father and the Holy Ghost; we do not with- 
 draw it from the complete object of our homage, but we do 
 not recognize it as the special object which directly occasions 
 this homage ; we adore and bless it in a manifestation apart 
 from it and less sublime in essence, but closer to us and there- 
 fore more capable of impressing us ; we assign a proper ob- 
 ject to the devotion, an object analogous to those which have 
 given rise to other devotions tending directly to the Incarnate 
 Word ; we fix our attention upon an affection, a friendship, 
 perfectly comprehensible to us because in human form, as on 
 a benefit of uncreated love, a benefit of the same order as 
 other devotions to the Saviour’s Humanity but, by reason of 
 its universality, superior to the example, the liberality and 
 the special suffering which we contemplate in them. 
 
 B. The Value and Dignity of Christ’s Created Love. 
 
 1. In itself this love is at the very summit of the created 
 order. No affection is purer in its intention, more constant 
 in its duration, richer in its gifts, more ineffably tender in its 
 effusions ; and it is the act of a will so enriched by a plenitude 
 
Christ's Created Love. 
 
 51 
 
 of graces and gifts as to become their inexhaustible source ; 
 finally this love partakes of the substantial holiness of the 
 Word to which it is united. 
 
 2. As Christ’s love, it is of a strictly infinite value. Since 
 this truth includes the mystery of the hypostatic union, I 
 shall not say that it should be better understood, but that it 
 should certainly be more seriously meditated upon. While 
 acknowledging that in Christ the unity of person combines 
 with the duality of natures, we are nevertheless too much in- 
 clined to picture to ourselves as something distinct and com- 
 plete in itself not only the Person of the Word and the Divine 
 Nature with which this Person is identified, but also the 
 Human Nature in which, by a prerogative of Its infinity, the 
 Word has subsisted since the Incarnation. We shall form a 
 better concept, if we ever bear in mind that from the time of 
 the Incarnation the Human Nature is not something exterior 
 to the Person of the Word (1) and a sort of cloak in which 
 it is enveloped: far from reducing itself to a mere juxtaposi- 
 tion, the union of the Word and the Human Nature is just 
 as intimate as the union between a human person and his 
 nature. Now, in the state of union the person and the nature 
 constitute a single subsisting being. The nature receives its 
 completion from the person, independently of which we could 
 not conceive it as existing. How impossible to address the 
 nature without addressing the person ! As well honor a 
 thought without the thinking mind. The better to insist upon 
 this idea, (2) though it be far from our purpose here to give 
 the preference to any one philosophical theory, we shall refer 
 to the Thomist doctrine which provides such a just conception 
 of the intimacy of this union. It decomposes every finite being 
 into two principles: one, the essence by which it is this rather 
 than that; the other, the existence by which this is. These 
 two principles form a single concrete reality. Well then, the 
 
 (1) Franzelin, De Verbo incarnato, p. 466, note. 
 
 (2) In representing the person as giving positive completion we have 
 already insinuated the Thomist explanation, having done so merely 
 in order to simplify matters. 
 
52 Created Love of the Sacred Heart is Basis of Devotion. 
 
 Human Nature of the Word is not completed by a created 
 existence ; without any change in Itself the Person of the 
 Word supplies this act for the Human Nature of Christ: It 
 is that by which this Nature exists. Under this aspect, the 
 adoration and the dignity of the Word appear as having fallen 
 to the lot of the Human Nature, and the latter could not be 
 the object of special homage proportionate only to its finite 
 essence ; the Human Nature is co-adored with the Person of 
 the Word, as a single theandric reality. To the question: Is 
 there, in Christ, a complete reality, purely divine f we must 
 answer: yes; Is there a purely human reality? No; there is a 
 divine reality and a theandric reality. What a marvel of 
 omnipotence and goodness ! In the Heart of the Incarnate 
 Word God gives us a divinihed , deified love.(l) 
 
 C. Why the Special Reason for the Devotion to the Sacr . d 
 Heart is Furnished by Created, not Uncreated Love. 
 
 1. First motive. — The special reason of this devotion is 
 found in the living Heart of the Saviour, considered as the real 
 symbol of His love for us. (2) But as the living Heart of the 
 Saviour is the real symbol of His created love it could not 
 therefore be that of His uncreated love. In fact, as we have 
 already shown by arguments based upon reason and authority, 
 the Heart is the real symbol of the love which It renders sensi- 
 ble and of which It feels the slightest repercussion. Now. 
 created love, both sensible and spiritual, and created love only, 
 finds an echo within the Human Heart of the Saviour and is 
 rendered directly sensible by that Heart. Hence, the Sacred 
 Heart is the real, direct symbol of created love only. 
 
 Even those who would introduce uncreated love must agree 
 to this. It is in another way that they recognize in the Heart 
 of Christ the symbol of this love. They appeal, for instance, 
 to a sort of anthropomorphism in Holy Scripture which ad- 
 mits of representing by a heart, even the love of God. But 
 
 (1) Muzzarelli, op. cit., p. 10. 
 
 (2) See the proofs furnished in Section IV of this study. 
 
Devotion to the Sacred Heart Rests on Created Love. 53 
 
 this imaginary symbolism (1) which would hold, whether 
 Our Lord became incarnate or not, has nothing in common 
 with real symbolism which makes the Heart of Jesus and His 
 love a single object of worship. (2) The Heart of the Divinity 
 exists merely on canvas, as a simple picture worthy of relative 
 honor only. (3) 
 
 If they resort rather to the perfect union of the two wills, 
 in virtue of which the Human Will of Christ loves nothing 
 not loved by His Divine Will, they merely succeed in showing 
 that the Heart of Jesus does not directly manifest uncreated 
 love, but only by means of created affection ; therefore the 
 latter only constitutes the object directly symbolized. 
 
 When, in her account of the revelation, Blessed Margaret 
 Mary represents Christ as saying : “ Behold ” not only “ Him 
 Who loves you,” but, “ Behold the Heart which has loved men 
 so much,” what idea is directly evoked other than that of 
 created love? Is it not indeed the love of a human heart? 
 
 Correctly speaking, the complete object of the devotion 
 to the Sacred Heart is therefore the God-Man, loving in His 
 Human Nature in which we know Him to be infinitely amia- 
 ble for “ in the mysteries of the life and Passion of Christ, 
 the God-Man is acting and suffering in His Humanity.” (4) 
 And this very analogy confirms the conviction we are en- 
 deavoring to establish. 
 
 2. Second Motive. — First let us recall with Father Nilles, 
 that the devotion and the feast of the Sacred Heart have one 
 and the same object. The preamble to the decree of conces- 
 sion states that the feast was asked for and granted in order 
 to increase a devotion already established. (5) 
 
 According to Benedict XIV, “ no feast in honor of Christ 
 
 (1) We say imaginary, not metaphorical: the heart taken as a 
 symbol is not a metaphorical heart. Where the term heart is sub- 
 stituted for love, it is used in a metaphorical sense, but is not taken 
 as a symbol. 
 
 (2) Heretofore explained in Section IV. 
 
 (3) See, On devotion to the picture, Franzelin, De Verbo incarnato, 
 vol. II, p. 458.. 
 
 (4) Franzelin, op. cit., p. 468. 
 
 (5) Nilles, De Rationibus . . . , vol. I, p. 224. 
 
54 Devotion to the Sacked Heart Rests on Created Love. 
 
 refers to the Son as the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity; 
 these feasts are all feasts of Christ, that is to say, of God made 
 Man, representing the singular graces and profound mysteries 
 which the Incarnate Word has operated for the salvation of 
 mankind.” (1) 
 
 Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Divinum illud on devotion to the 
 Holy Ghost, formulates these two general propositions : there 
 is no feast in honor of the Word according to its Divine Na- 
 ture; the honors of Christ reflect upon the Trinity. . 
 
 But the love which Jesus Christ bears us in His Divine 
 Nature is a love which He has as Second Person of the 
 Blessed Trinity. Therefore, if this love were directly honored, 
 the Word as Second Person of the Blessed Trinity would be 
 honored, and the honor would not need to reflect upon the 
 Trinity; it would be given to the Trinity Itself. 
 
 Perhaps the exception may be raised, that this worship 
 would not be directed only to the Second Person of the Holy 
 Trinity, but that it would be mixed, divided between the two 
 natures. But it should be observed that the proposition of 
 Benedict XIV is exclusive: to deny that the feasts of Christ 
 are in honor of the Word as Second Person of the Blessed 
 Trinity is also to deny that such feasts could even partially 
 refer to Him. Besides, a mixed or miscellaneous devotion 
 seems to us to present serious inconveniences. Is it not liable 
 to engender confusion? Authors who are admirable in other 
 respects, speak of a love of Christ at once divine and human ; 
 of a love of both natures. Now, according to our way of 
 thinking, it is quite as deplorable to allude to one love in 
 Christ as to one will, notwithstanding the orthodox explana- 
 tion which these expressions may receive. At last we see of 
 what dissimilar elements our opponents would compose the 
 special object of the devotion. To introduce both uncreated 
 and created love into the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the 
 Heart must be taken first in the proper sense, then figura- 
 tively ; or at least two different symbolical significations must 
 
 (l) De Beatif. ct Canonizatione, liv. p. 2, XXX, n. 2. 
 
Devotion to the Sacred Heart Rests on Created Love. 55 
 
 be attached to It. The worship of the Humanity of Christ be- 
 comes the worship of the Divine Nature when, from created, 
 we pass to uncreated love. In short, the latter performs the 
 functions of the direct and the final object. This all seems 
 too complicated for the truth, and piety has nothing to gain 
 from explanations (1) which are so involved. 
 
 Besides, what of the poor and lowly? Can we forget them 
 when speaking of the Heart of Him whose chosen ones they 
 are? Surely they will not raise the question as to the nature 
 of the love presented to them, whether theandric or divine. 
 In fact the discussion exceeds their comprehension too far 
 to interest them. But will not the solution which the priest 
 holds as true influence the way in which the devotion will be 
 proposed from the pulpit, or in the popular brochures com- 
 monly circulated? Do not the discourses heard and the writ- 
 ings perused sometimes leave the impression of an object too 
 indefinitely circumscribed or too complex? But, if we mistake 
 not, the explanation to which we have subscribed frames the 
 devotion to the Sacred Heart in a well-defined concept easily 
 grasped by all. Indeed, all its elements may be included in a 
 short series of questions and answers. — Who is the recipient 
 of our homage in the worship of the Sacred Heart? Jesus 
 Christ. — In what part of His Sacred Body is He especially 
 honored? In His Heart. — Why? Because of the immense 
 love, repaid by ingratitude, which that Heart represents. — 
 What is this love? A love like ours in form, but infinite in 
 value, the most signal proofs of which were the sorrowful 
 Passion and the institution of the Holy Eucharist. — What acts 
 must be offered it? 'Acts of love and atonement and frequent 
 communions of reparation. 
 
 Finally let us add in favor of our thesis, that it emphasizes 
 the dignity of the Humanity of the Word and brings into re- 
 lief the role played by that Humanity : a role that serves to 
 bring God and man into closer relationship. Those who in 
 this devotion seem to place created and uncreated love on the 
 
 (1) Like Muzzarelli’s. 
 
56 How Uncreated Love Enters Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 same footing promote the interests of neither one nor the other. 
 Created love risks being eclipsed by uncreated love; the latter 
 in its turn is masked by created love which, in their ex- 
 planations, these devotees must constantly recall, even to the 
 point of seeming to forget the love which, in essence, is 
 infinite. 
 
 At the time of writing our dissertation it was our good 
 fortune to meet in the Messager du Sacre-Coeur (1868, p. 275, 
 etc.) an article that permits us to identify our opinion with 
 that of Pere H. Ramiere. Here is his formal testimony: 
 “ Although the eternal and divine love with which Our Lord 
 Jesus Christ is inflamed is in no way foreign to the devotion 
 to His loving Heart, the proper object of this devotion is His 
 human and created love Then follow the reasons developed 
 to the end of the article. 
 
 D. How , in a Broad Sense, Uncreated Love may Become the 
 Special Object of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 Some great authors without putting the two loves on the 
 same level grant that, in a broad sense , the Heart of Jesus 
 symbolizes both created and uncreated love. Such is the 
 opinion of Marques, Father Nilles, Father de San and Father 
 Nix. To the decree of 1765 heretofore explained, which con- 
 stitutes their principal argument, they add the following theo- 
 logical reason: The perfect agreement of the two wills in 
 Christ makes us see in created love the inspiration of un- 
 created love ; therefore the Heart that symbolizes the first 
 comes to symbolize the second. 
 
 Let us set this conclusion aside for a moment; their rea- 
 soning fails to attain its end. It does not tally with the 
 decree of the Sacred Congregation which they endeavor not 
 to contradict. In fact this decree speaks of the love which 
 led the Son of God to become man. If, to follow them, we 
 must understand this love to be uncreated love, it historically 
 and logically preceded the formation of the Heart of Jesus 
 and the transports of created love. Hence it has no connec- 
 tion whatever with a created love non-existent at the time, and 
 
How Uncreated Love Enters Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 57 
 
 the agreement of the two wills in Christ does not explain the 
 symbol. 
 
 Moreover, this reasoning would propose as the material 
 object the divine love guiding and inspiring the Saviour in 
 His Human Nature. But neither the Roman Congregation 
 nor the Gospel speaks thus. The divine will to which Christ 
 conforms His human will is referred by Him to His Father. 
 “ I do always the things that please him. : . . Not my will, 
 but thine, be done.”(l) The divine love that guides the 
 Saviour is attributed to the Holy Ghost. It was under the 
 influence of the Holy Ghost that Jesus went into the desert; 
 it was by virtue of the Holy Ghost that He expelled demons 
 and the Evangelist recalls the prophetic announcement, “ The 
 Spirit of the Lord is upon me.” (2) 
 
 And to show in a word the deficiency of the reasoning itself, 
 does it follow that because the created love of Christ manifests 
 an uncreated love, the latter is any other than the final object 
 of the devotion, such as we have explained it? (3) It is true 
 that the flame of Jesus’ love rises heavenward and causes us 
 to acknowledge and bless an eternal and infinite love; but we 
 must not confound the object which we honor with the ulti- 
 mate end toward which our homage should be directed. 
 
 What, however, is to be thought of that symbolism which, 
 according to these authors, applies by extension to uncreated 
 love, because of the perfect agreement of the divine will with 
 the human will of Christ? 
 
 Frankly, we do not favor it. Besides, is it sufficient that 
 two wills be united upon the same object in order that the 
 symbol of the one be that of the other? Were the wills of a 
 like nature we would say yes ; but when they are separated 
 by the wide differences distinguishing the uncreated from the 
 created, the eternal and immutable from that which is tem- 
 poral and successive, is it appropriate, is it even possible to 
 give them the same symbolical representation ? Assuredly 
 
 (1) Jn. VIII, 29. St. Luke XXII, 42; and elsewhere in St. John. 
 
 (2) Matt. IV, 1; Luke XI, 20; IV, 18. 
 
 (3) See first point in this subdivision : paragraph A. 
 
58 How Uncreated Love Enters Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 by a sort of anthropomorphism, of which we have already 
 spoken, the heart of the imaginary body with which we invest 
 God, would be the imaginary symbol of divine love. But in 
 this symbolism, which follows a first reduction of the Divinity 
 to the proportions of man, no one is mistaken either as to the 
 meaning or the deficient character of the representation. On 
 the contrary, to our mind, the Heart of Our Lord is too really 
 the symbol of the theandric affections to stand at the same 
 time for an imaginary symbol of the purely divine affections, 
 even though these should be fixed upon the same objects. 
 
 However, we refrain from openly contradicting the authors 
 who admit that, in a broad sense, the Heart of Christ can 
 symbolize uncreated love. Their conclusion can be accepted 
 on one condition only, which is that the love in question may 
 be called the love of Christ, as proper to Christ or attributed 
 to Him. In imposing this condition we are following the 
 doctrine so forcibly inculcated by Leo XIII in his Encyclical 
 on the Holy Ghost: no divine person is given special honor 
 except that provoked by an exterior mission either proper to 
 or attributed to that person. 
 
 The mission which the Word accomplishes in His Humanity 
 is proper to Him , and His Heart symbolizes the created love 
 with which It has real affinities. In a wider sense the Heart 
 may also symbolize an uncrated love which, in consequence of 
 attribution , is assimilated to the first. Is there one? St. 
 Thomas replies affirmatively. Although the Incarnation of 
 the Son of God was decided upon and brought about by the 
 entire Blessed Trinity, according to the rules of appropria- 
 tion set forth by the sainted Doctor, the Father is supposed 
 to have given the order which the Son is reputed to have 
 executed in assuming human nature ; that is to say, in taking 
 not only a soul but a body, the forming of which is attributed 
 to the Holy Ghost. Hence we can speak of a love that moved 
 the Father to give or to send His Son (1) and of a love 
 which prompted this Son to take upon Himself human na- 
 
 (1) John, ITT, 16. 
 
Conclusions and Corollaries. 
 
 59 
 
 ture. (1) It is this uncreated love of which the decree of 
 1765 speaks, if indeed, uncreated love is to be therein under- 
 stood. The Heart of Christ symbolizes uncreated love for 
 another reason than that which makes it symbolize created 
 love. It is the symbol of the latter because of a real corre- 
 spondence with the affections of human nature, whereas it is 
 the symbol of the uncreated love appropriated to Christ, only 
 by virtue of an imaginary representation which gives a human 
 form to the Divine Person Itself. 
 
 E. Conclusions and Corollaries. 
 
 We must decidedly exclude from the Devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart uncreated love as manifested in the creation and 
 in the Old Testament. These amplifications deprive the devo- 
 tion of its special character and proper influence ; they cause 
 it to lose itself in ambiguity. 
 
 The revelations of Blessed Margaret Mary do not speak 
 of Our Lord's love for His Father. In the documents of the 
 Holy See the only allusion to it is that discreetly made by the 
 bishops of Poland. Hence we shall not consider this love the 
 direct object of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. Jesus 
 wishes to touch us by the love He bears us ! But in respond- 
 ing to the advances of Our Sweet Saviour, in accomplishing 
 His desires, we should pledge ourselves to imitate His virtues 
 and among these there shines forth with singular brilliancy 
 His love for His Father, which was the principle virtue of 
 His Heart. Did He not say : “ That the world may know 
 
 that I love the Father! ”(2) Why then should not the friends 
 of His Heart take heed of this? 
 
 In giving us the devotion to His Sacred Heart Our Lord’s 
 love exhausted itself in its effort thus to bless the Christians 
 of these later centuries. (3) Hence we shall not try to assign 
 any more remote date to this cherished form of worship and 
 by so doing overlook the dominant characteristics of the de- 
 ft) St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, part III, q. XXXII, a. 1, ad 1. 
 
 (2) John, XIV, 33. 
 
 (3) Vie et Oeuvres dc la bienheureuse Marguerite-Marie Alacoque . 
 
 t. II, p. 275. 
 
GO 
 
 Conclusions and Corollaries. 
 
 votion as we practice it to-day, only to confound it with the 
 enthusiastic homage formerly paid to the love or to the Heart 
 of Jesus by certain saints. To be sure the foundation of the 
 devotion was revealed with Christianity, and we may say that 
 ever since the Last Supper it has had reason to exist. From 
 that time when the excessive love of Our Lord led Him to 
 give Himself up to death for us and to institute the Blessed 
 Eucharist, has not that love been subjected to the grossest 
 neglect and blackest ingratitude? But it remained as if hidden 
 in the Bosom of God till the moment when Jesus, through 
 the voice of a humble religious, proposed “ to Christians an 
 object and a means so well qualified to engage their love.”(l) 
 
 2. When speaking or writing let us not hesitate to bring 
 Jesus Christ and His love close to the people as, by so doing, 
 we shall be entering into the very designs of Our Lord Him- 
 self Who wished to draw us to His Heart, so as to render us 
 more sensible to the delicacy and immensity of His love. Let 
 us then put clearly before the eyes of the faithful a Heart 
 that really beats and experiences emotions similar to those 
 which they themselves feel in their best moments ; a Heart 
 that, if it can no longer suffer, can nevertheless be truly com- 
 forted by them and take delight in their affections ;(2j a 
 Heart more sensible than any other heart to the influence of 
 all the sentiments of the soul ; a Heart that loves them to 
 excess with a love of the same form as that which they may 
 offer in return. When identified with the Divine Nature, love 
 is too far beyond all conception to easily move us. Human 
 in form, divine in the person possessing it, it is worthy of all 
 homage and most capable of touching us. The love of the 
 Heart of Jesus, like Jesus Christ Himself, is the excellent, the 
 indispensable way, human and yet divine, which leads us up 
 to the Father, that is to say, to the Adorable Trinity. We 
 honor the living Heart of Jesus to find therein the theandric 
 
 (1) Vie et Oeuvres . . . , t. II, p. 275. 
 
 (2) In writing these lines we recall the impression which this simple 
 remark made upon a priest exercising the sacred ministry: “We can 
 really give joy to Our Lord! What a discovery! What advantages 
 I hope to reap from it ! What a resource for touching hearts ! ” 
 
Conclusions and Corollaries. 
 
 61 
 
 love which it symbolizes and by means of which we may be 
 elevated even to uncreated love, of which this theandric love 
 itself is a supreme gift. 
 
 3. A way different from that followed by Father Billot, 
 brings us, however, to the formula of the professor in the 
 Roman College : “ In the Incarnate Word, the Heart is the 
 symbol of uncreated love which caused the Word to descend 
 upon earth and of created love which manifested itself from 
 the first instant and led Him even unto the cross. . . '. The 
 contemplation of the Sacred Heart recalls to us all the prin- 
 ciples of our salvation/’ (1) 
 
 But such is the object of the devotion in its broadest concep- 
 tion. The revelations of the Blessed One, the authority of 
 the first promoters and of many theologians, the lessons of 
 the Breviary and theological reasoning confine within nar- 
 rower limits the proper and precise idea of the devotion. If, 
 as we have said and repeated, its complete object is the God- 
 Man loving us in His Human Nature, the special object of 
 the devotion is the Heart of Christ with the created love which 
 It symbolizes : this love which spent itself in the sacrifice of 
 the cross and of the altar. The love symbolized demonstrates 
 in its turn an uncreated love common to the Father, the Son 
 and the Holy Ghost, to Whom by the worship of the Sacred 
 Heart we finally give homage. 
 
 Sublime indeed are such proofs of love as the cross and the 
 Eucharist, but still more sublime is the love which inspires 
 them. And when this love is conceived in the human way 
 and, on the other hand, divinihed by the person possessing it, 
 these created inspirations of a God draw us irresistibly to 
 . God and to His infinite love. The Heart of Christ is the 
 supreme pledge of the eternal love of God. Such is the devo- 
 tion to the Sacred Heart. St. Paul gave its formula when he 
 said : “ Dilexit me et tradidit semetipsum pro me. He loved 
 me and delivered Himself for me.” (2) It is to this love that 
 
 (1) De Verbo incarnato, p. 332. 
 
 (2) Gal . , II, 20. 
 
62 Conclusions and Corollaries. 
 
 the devotion to the Sacred Heart calls our attention and our 
 gratitude. 
 
 Gratitude! Alas, what a sad spectacle of ingratitude do 
 we not behold ! The call to love becomes the call to repara- 
 tion. This last feature completes the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart, and Mgr. d’Hulst has well defined it as the perpetuity 
 of the Holy Hour. (1) 
 
 4. The custom has prevailed of addressing ones self to the 
 Heart of Jesus as to His Person Itself. A legitimate custom, 
 said the bishops of Poland in their Memorial, (2) because all 
 that terminates in the heart terminates in the person. 
 
 However, it is important thoroughly to understand this 
 mode of expression. Invocations addressed to the Heart of 
 Jesus should be understood as if it were said : Jesus, Who 
 hast a Heart, and this Heart should be taken in its proper 
 sense as the real Heart which at the same time is the symbol 
 of love. 
 
 But since the Heart, properly speaking, symbolizes only 
 created love, all the qualities attributed to the Heart should, 
 in so far as possible, be understood as belonging to the 
 Saviour’s Human Nature. Thus by infinity will be meant 
 infiniteness of dignity; (3) omnipotence, the power that is 
 Christ’s by virtue of His Passion and death : “ All power is 
 given to me in heaven and on earth.” (4) There is no invoca- 
 tion in any of the approved litanies, no versicle or prayer in 
 the Little Office (5) that calls for another interpretation. 
 
 However, the person invoked combines all the attributes 
 of the Divinity and the Humanity. Invocations such as this : 
 Heart of Jesus, save me; correspond perfectly to : Jesus, by 
 Thy Sacred Heart, by Its tenderness, save me! By using 
 similar expressions we draw from Christ’s Human Nature, 
 
 (1) Lettres de direction, 2, p. 74, Lettre L. 
 
 (2) Nilles, De Rationibus . . . , 4, p. 117, n. 33. 
 
 (3) Muzzarelli, op. cit., p. 16. The same author does not so well 
 interpret the expression “All-powerful Heart.” 
 
 (4) Matthew, XXVIII, 18. 
 
 (5) A stanza in Lauds of the Divine Office recalls, as we have al- 
 ready seen, the love as the cause of the Incarnation. See paragraph 
 4, note 1, of this study. 
 
Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. 
 
 63 
 
 from His Heart, from some one of Its qualities, a reason which 
 entitles us to the intervention of the Divine Person and of 
 its divinity itself. It follows that, if the Heart or the qual- 
 ity attributed to It must be akin to the Human Nature, always 
 united to the Divine Person, the action solicited requires, in 
 fact, always will require, the intervention of the Divinity. 
 Although Our Lord intercedes for us in His Humanity, we 
 do not beg Him in the vocative to pray for us.(l) The save 
 us of the invocation heretofore quoted is therefore not iden- 
 tical with the similarly worded appeal to the Blessed Virgin 
 nor indeed with that of the formula Heart of Jesus, salvation 
 of sinners; but it is the save us addressed to the Divinity. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament Compared With the 
 Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 Our plan calls for a brief sketch of the Devotion to the 
 Blessed Sacrament which directly honors the Body of Jesus 
 Christ, as is testified by the name of the feast: The Solemnity 
 of the Body of the Lord. In the Blessed Eucharist the Body 
 only is present in virtue of the words of consecration ; the Soul 
 and Divinity are there by concomitance and as inseparable 
 from the Saviour’s glorious Body. 
 
 Thanks to this Sacrament Jesus is present amongst us; He 
 immolates Himself for us and His Body becomes the spiritual 
 nourishment of our souls, the pledge of our immortality. This 
 triple blessing, the presence, the immolation and the giving 
 in nourishment, constitutes the special reason for the honor 
 we give to Christ. 
 
 To these motives, drawn directly from the consideration 
 of an infinite munificence, may be added those suggested by 
 the sight of our ingratitude toward the Author of these super- 
 eminent benefits. 
 
 (1) However, we ask Him to present His Wounds to His Father; 
 we have recourse to His meditation with the Divinity. We always 
 pray through Christ. 
 
64 
 
 Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. 
 
 If we compare this devotion with the devotion to the Sacred 
 Heart, we find that, on the one hand, the devotion to the 
 Blessed Sacrament honors the entire Body, while the devo- 
 tion to the Sacred Heart honors but a part. On the other 
 hand, the Real Presence, the immolation and the giving in 
 nourishment, commemorated in the worship of the Blessed 
 Sacrament, constitute together one of the two great benefits 
 which the devotion to the Sacred Heart refers to the love of 
 Jesus Christ. Even the other benefit, the Passion, is not for- 
 eign to the devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, as this Sacra- 
 ment is the memorial of the Saviour’s Passion ; the very time 
 of its institution recalls the Passion; it is completed during 
 the course of the sacrifice, which is a continuation of that 
 on Calvary ; it was symbolized by the Precious Blood that 
 flowed from Our Lord’s open Side ; and the mystical separa- 
 tion on our altars, of the Body and Blood of the Saviour, 
 represents the Passion and death of Christ. 
 
 Hence it is easy to understand why there should have been 
 such conflicting views as to whether the object of both devo- 
 tions was sufficiently distinct to warrant the simultaneous 
 commemoration of one and the other in the Office and the 
 Mass. The negative solution of the question prevailed. Ac- 
 cording to the opinion of the Sacred Congregation of Rites 
 we not only honor the same Person in the Blessed Sacrament 
 and in the Sacred Heart, but even commemorate the same 
 mystery. It is for this reason that all commemoration of the 
 Blessed Sacrament is excluded from the Mass of the Sacred 
 Heart and vice versa. { 1) 
 
 Should it be asked why, on the eve of the Feast of the 
 
 Sacred Heart, the Vespers are those of the octave of the 
 
 Blessed Sacrament rather than of the feast of the morrow, 
 
 the two following reasons reproduced in the latest edition of 
 
 the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (2) may be 
 
 » 
 
 given: the Feast of the Blessed Sacrament is primary and 
 
 (1) Collectio Decretomm authenticorum, n. 3924, Decree of Julv 
 3, 1896, ad IV. 
 
 (2) Vol. IV, pp. 248-249. 
 
Devotion to the Holy Ghost. 
 
 65 
 
 privileged, whereas the Feast of the Sacred Heart is a second- 
 ary feast of Our Lord; moreover, “although the object of 
 both feasts be the same,(l) one feast presents us with the 
 reality of which the other offers us the symbol.” 
 
 Besides, from the very beginning, the Feast of the Sacred 
 Heart has been looked upon as a prolongation of the Feast of 
 Corpus Christi, its date being purposely placed after the octave 
 of this solemnity in order to call our attention to the insults 
 suffered by Our Lord in the Sacrament of His love. The 
 Feast of the Sacred Heart is invested with an expiatory 
 character which makes it in a special way a public reparation 
 for the carelessness and indifference manifested during the 
 solemnity of Corpus Christi. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Devotion to the Holy Ghost Compared with the Devo- 
 tion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. 
 
 Another sublime devotion, likewise inspired by divine love, 
 is that to the Holy Ghost, and we shall endeavor to give in a 
 few words a clear idea of it. 
 
 The mission of the Word to mankind occasioned the special 
 devotion to Jesus Christ, and the mission of the Holy Ghost 
 to mankind gave rise to the devotion to the Holy Ghost. 
 There is, however, this notable difference. Jesus Christ is 
 lovable and adorable in a humanity which is truly His. hypo- 
 statically united to His person ; the Holy Ghost is lovable and 
 adorable in benefits exterior to His Person, common to all 
 Three Divine Persons and simply attributed to the Third. In 
 the devotion to the Holy Ghost the Third Person of the 
 
 (l) Is it a mistake to see the ideas stated in the course of this 
 work confirmed by this direction which contradicts several authors 
 and preceding opinions? In thus treating the question of commemora- 
 tions the Congregation of Rites holds to the object of the Feast as it 
 is described in Lesson VI of the Office ; and we were right in seeking 
 there, above all, the actual opinion of the Holy See. It is on condition 
 of seeing in the devotion to the Sacred Heart the devotion to the 
 love of Christ suffering and instituting the Blessed Eucharist in memory 
 even of His death, that one may consider, as it were, identical in 
 object the feast of the real Heart, the symbol of that love, and the 
 Feast of the Sacrament which is the memorial of the Passion. 
 
66 
 
 Devotion to the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Blessed Trinity is directly honored just as the Person of the 
 Word directly receives the honor called forth by the devotion 
 to the Sacred Heart: in both cases the entire Blessed Trinity 
 is honored indirectly. But in the devotion to the Holy Ghost 
 the honor does not attain a nature or a quality proper to the 
 Holy Ghost, as in the devotion to the Sacred Heart the 
 homage is paid to the Heart and the love proper to the In- 
 carnate Word as well as to the Person. All the benefits of 
 divine love, that is, all divine benefits, the creation, the super- 
 natural vocation, the sanctification, even the Incarnation, are 
 the reason for the existence of this devotion to the Holy 
 Ghost, as the loving action and Passion of the Incarnate Word 
 are the motive of the worship of the Sacred Heart; but we 
 are considering above all that mission of the Holy Ghost which 
 completes and crowns the mission of the Incarnate Word, in 
 granting us either through an immediate interior operation 
 or the channel of the sacraments, the grace and the glory 
 merited by Jesus Christ; and also in the devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart, although we commemorate the whole Redemp- 
 tion, the Incarnate Word entire, we especially honor the Pas- 
 sion and Eucharist. 
 
 Not only is the Holy Ghost one with the Father and the 
 Son, but He proceeds from the Father and the Son ; therefore 
 we can readily understand how the worship and the glory 
 given to the Holy Ghost are at the same time given to the 
 Father, to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. If it is in accord- 
 ance with our nature to attribute divine love and its works 
 to one Person, this in no wise diverts our homage from the 
 end toward which it should tend, which is the entire Divinity, 
 the principle and end of all things. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 1. Devotion to the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus. 
 
 The expression Eucharistic Heart of Jesus taken alone, may 
 signify Heart of Jesus to which we owe the Eucharist , just 
 as “ Agonizing Heart of Jesus ” means the Heart I consider 
 at this moment in Its loving Passion, or else “ Heart of Jesus 
 present in the Blessed Eucharist.” 
 
 It is this second acceptation that is adopted in the recently 
 approved devotion of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus. To be 
 convinced of this it will only be necessary to read over the in- 
 dulgenced prayers, particularly this invocation : “ Praised, 
 
 adored, loved and thanked be at all times the Eucharistic 
 Heart of Jesus, in all the tabernacles of the world, unto the 
 end of time!” (100 days’ indulgence once a day.) It is 
 nevertheless clear that in considering the Eucharistic Saviour 
 our attention will be especially drawn to the benefit of His 
 Presence in the Blessed Sacrament. 
 
 This expression Eucharistic Heart is evidently adapted to 
 rhetorical development, which will be more or less correct 
 and successful according to the talent and learning of the 
 author. 
 
 But, in reality, since there is only one Heart of Jesus, glori- 
 ous in Heaven, glorious, though hidden, in the tabernacle 
 (since, in the tabernacle, the Heart has neither sentiment nor 
 action proper to the Eucharistic state) this devotion does not 
 
 67 
 
68 
 
 Practice of the Devotion. 
 
 effectively differ from the devotion to the Sacred Heart. (1) 
 It seeks the Heart where it really is, in the Holy Eucharist, 
 by directing our attention in a particular manner to the im- 
 mense benefit of the permanent gift of Himself thus made us 
 by Jesus Christ. 
 
 It was in the tabernacle that Blessed Margaret Mary de- 
 lighted to adore the Divine Heart, and indeed many writers 
 think that the worship of the Eucharistic Sacred Heart was 
 the same that she sought to propagate. (2) 
 
 2. The Practice of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. 
 
 According to Pere de Gallifet’s beautiful formula the de- 
 votion should respond in full to the dignity, love and addiction 
 of the Heart of Jesus. 
 
 The principal end of the devotion is to “ repair by love and 
 adoration and all kinds of homage the many insults to which 
 the excess of His love exposes Jesus Christ at all times in this 
 august Sacrament." (3) In expressing himself on the sub- 
 ject Pere Croiset simply repeats the words placed by Blessed 
 Margaret Mary in the mouth of Our Lord Himself. Pere de 
 Gallifet uses the same language(4) and the Memorial of- 
 fered under Benedict XIV to the Sacred Congregation of 
 Rites is based on his authority. This purpose of repara- 
 tion is also inculcated in the Office of Blessed Margaret Mary 
 (Lesson V) : “ While she was praying before the Blessed 
 
 Sacrament, Our Lord showed her through the opening in 
 His side, His Heart surrounded by flames and encircled with 
 thorns ; and He bade her devote herself to obtaining that, in 
 
 (1) “The worship of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus is not more 
 perfect than the worship of the Eucharist Itself and does not differ 
 from the worship of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (Decree of the Holy 
 Office, June 3, 1891.) And the Raccolta of Indulgences (edition of 
 1898), before giving the acts of homage to the Eucharistic Heart, 
 remarks that “ the devotion to the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus should 
 not be understood as differing in substance from that which the Church 
 already professes toward this same Heart.” 
 
 (2) See Blot’s le Coeur Eucharistique, t. I, n. 47. 
 
 (3) La Devotion au Sacre Coeur, part I, chapt. 3, to the end. 
 
 (4) De cultu . . . , liv. Ill, chapt. 3. 
 
Acts of the Devotion. 
 
 69 
 
 return for such love and in reparation for the insults suffered 
 from the ingratitude of men, His Heart would receive public 
 worship of which magnificent favors would be the reward.” 
 
 Here, as always, Our Lord was eager to turn even our 
 most generous acts to our supreme advantage. Final salva- 
 tion and abundance of all spiritual favors are promised to 
 those who honor the Heart of Jesus and endeavor to make It 
 known and loved. Therefore the worship has a secondary 
 end, a spiritual enrichment by which we ourselves will be the 
 first to profit and the sweet influence of which will be felt all 
 around us. 
 
 3. Acts of devotion. Here there is question of private devo- 
 tion only, which would not be real did it not join to exterior 
 acts the interior acts which are its very soul. Several authors 
 have carefully traced quite a complete programme of the acts 
 sanctioned by the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. 
 From the beginning of the devotion Pere Jean Croiset dedi- 
 cates the greater part of his work to the means of acquiring 
 the devotion and to practical exercises. The third book of 
 Pere de Gallifet’s celebrated treatise is entitled : De usu et 
 praxi Cultus S. Cordis Jesu } and still later Father de Franciosi, 
 in his beautiful book La Devotion au Sacre Coeur de Jesus et 
 au saint Coeur de Marie, also insists upon the practice of the 
 devotion and the means of acquiring it; and Father Bucce- 
 roni’s work, C ommentarii in cultum SS. Cordis Jesu, contains a 
 close analysis of the homage belonging to the devotion to the 
 Sacred Heart. 
 
 As to what concerns the interior acts we deem it well to 
 reproduce two of Father de Gallifet’s pages (Book III, 
 Chap. I). 
 
 “ The interior worship of the Heart of Jesus consists, for 
 the mind, in fathoming the excellence of the Divine Heart, 
 that is, Its dignity, sanctity, sublimity ; the treasures of grace 
 
70 
 
 Acts of the Devotion. 
 
 hidden within It ; all that It has endured for the glory of God 
 and the salvation of men ; how pleasing and precious It is to 
 the Most Holy Trinity; the attractions It possesses for all the 
 faithful ; briefly, in learning how much this Heart deserves 
 our love and our sovereign respect. These considerations 
 should excite within u^ an infinite esteem for this Holy Heart. 
 Such is the first foundation of the entire worship. 
 
 The first care of lovers of the Heart of Jesus should there- 
 fore be to acquire this knowledge, to apply their mind to its 
 contemplation and to searching its depths. For this purpose 
 reading alone will not suffice ; there must be meditation, better 
 still, prayer, and even the practice of the devotion. 
 
 Having thus trained the mind they will have but little 
 trouble in controlling the acts of the will, we mean to say the 
 affections that respond to the infinite excellence of the Heart 
 of Jesus. Supreme adoration is due to Its supreme dignity. 
 Its sovereign prerogatives and perfections are entitled to 
 admiration, glorification and praise : Its immense love merits 
 a reciprocal love ; the benefits of which It is for us the source 
 claim a suitable thanksgiving ; Its mercy invites confidence ; 
 the virtues of which It is the seat call for imitation ; the in- 
 sults which wound Its honor demand reparation ; and so on 
 with the rest. 
 
 And since nothing is dearer to the Heavenly Father than 
 this Divine Heart, we avail ourselves of Its nearness to Him 
 in order to render our actions and sufferings acceptable and 
 agreeable to the Divine Majesty, by uniting them all to the 
 actions and sufferings of this Most Holy Heart. Through 
 the Heart of Jesus we adore God, we praise Him, love Him, 
 implore favors of Him, give Him thanks, resign ourselves to 
 the Divine Will, ask pardon of our faults and so on. Finally, 
 and this practice, as it were, characterizes the devotion, we 
 compare the immense love with which the Heart of Jesus 
 burns for men with the insults which they in their ingratitude 
 
Acts of the Devotion. 
 
 73 
 
 heap upon It and, knowing ourselves to be among the number 
 of ingrates, covered with confusion and penetrated with sor- 
 row, we humbly entreat Its pardon and, prostrate before It, 
 offer from the bottom of our hearts and to the best of our 
 power, the atonement It so justly claims. This kind of 
 homage, as the nature of the devotion obviously proves, sub- 
 stantiates the most ardent desires of the Heart of Jesus. 
 
 The help of the memory and the frequent and familiar ap- 
 peals of this Divine Heart enable us to multiply beyond reck- 
 oning the acts or exercises peculiar to the interior worship 
 and, while contributing to its entire perfection, necessarily 
 lead us to the exterior worship. 
 
 We shall limit ourselves to mentioning the principal acts of 
 exterior worship: the celebration of the Feast of the Sacred 
 Heart and of the First Friday, especially by the visit, the 
 amende honorable, the consecration, and the communion of 
 reparation ;(1) the weekly observance of Friday by meditation 
 and the practice of the Holy Hour ; the daily devotion of obla- 
 tion and prayer; the exposing of the picture of the Sacred 
 Heart; frequent and fervent communion : it is the last that 
 brings us heart to heart with Our Lord. And here we must 
 not forget to mention imitation. (2) so dear to the Heart of 
 
 (1) We know the great promise attached to the communion of 
 the nine First Fridays. See our commentary published in Ftudes, 
 1903, vol. XCV, p. 593, or our brochure : la Grande Promesse, Paris. 
 Retaux. 
 
 (2) The imitation of the virtues of Our Lord is an excellent form 
 with which to clothe reparative love. And the qualities of Our Lord’s 
 Heart, especially its meekness and humility, should be proposed as 
 examples. Does St. Paul not emphatically teach this in the passage 
 already quoted from his Epistle to the Philippians (II, 5) ? Thus 
 conceived, the devotion to the Sacred Heart contains nothing that is not 
 legitimate and salutary ; and it is presented under this aspect in the 
 Decree of 1766 and the prayer of the Office approved for Venice. How- 
 ever, this concept is not that bequeathed to us in the revelations of 
 Blessed Margaret Mary. Imitation is not excluded from it, but neither 
 is it indicated; it is a concrete way of loving and atoning. 
 
Dat- 
 
 1 
 
 BOSTON COLLEGE 
 
 3 9031 
 
 342346 2 
 
 72 The Acts of Devotion. 
 
 Jesus, because it turns to practical account His Passion, death 
 and the Eucharist and brings us ever closer to Him ; and 
 finally the Apostleship which, by making them fruitful, crowns 
 both virtue and love. 
 
 All these acts are acts o r evotion to the Sacred Heart, 
 above all when we perform them out of love and reparation, 
 the two g. ' f duties of him who loves the Heart of Jesus. 
 And furthei co stimulate our ardor let us consider that if the 
 sorrows of the Heart of Jesus necessarily belong to the past, 
 the Saviour can even now feel in His Heart the sweet joy 
 which a faithful, generous friendship insures to men. 
 
 Let us close this paragraph by quoting a few lines from the 
 portrait drawn by Pere Croiset(l) of the man who loves 
 Jesus Christ perfectly. “ The man who loves Jesus Christ 
 perfectly is a man without self-love, without dissimulation, 
 without ambition ; a man strict with himself at all times and 
 never excusing himself, yet extremely lenient with others, in 
 whose favor he excuses everything. Honest but not affected, 
 complacent but not cowardly, obliging but not self-interested, 
 extremely exact but not scrupulous, constantly united to God 
 but not vehement, never idle yet not seeming over assiduous, 
 never too much absorbed in nor yet distracted by his occu- 
 pations, he always keeps his heart untrammelled, occupying 
 it solely with the great affair of his salvation. He has but a 
 humble opinion of himself because conscious only of his de- 
 fects, whereas he esteems others on account of seeing naught 
 but their virtues.” 
 
 “ Increase,” the Apostle St. Peter exhorts us (2) “ in grace 
 and in the knowledge of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 
 To him be glory both now and in the day of eternity. Amen.” 
 
 A. Vermeersch. 
 
 (1) La Devotion au Sacre Cceur, part III, chap. 8, paragraph 1. 
 
 (2) II Peter, III, 18.