, 1879-02-02
a MAK WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE ElS
OWN ARGUMENT.

llr. MAlLQCh, t1e caSuSt auu Salllst.
known to many readers through his s'New
Republic" and s:New Paul and Virginia" !"
has caused a brisk discussion in English
religious circles By q series Of papers Just
concluded in the London Nineteenth Cen
tury. The tone Of these papers is very
favorable to the claims Of Catholicism They
have given color to the opinion, widely enter
tanned in some quarters, that Alr. MALLoCE
is Catholic himself. This opinion IS now,
however, set at rest By an authoritative de-
NAL In his last paper, on Intolerance aud
Persecution" he says thst his ''cri.icisms of
Catholicism are not the criticisms OF Cath
olic, but of complete outsider,-a literal
kepac," however, desires to estimate
fairly the character and prospects of ''the
one existing religion which seems still
capable Of either appealing to OR appeas-
ing the religious condition of our time,
Of course, there is an Inconsistency
in this position, and the keen critics Of tha
reviews have not been slow to perceive it and
point it out If Mr. MAILocR is so assured
Of the superior worth Of Catholicism, why
does he not embrace it? It is absurd for
him to point out road to salvation that be
will not travel himself. the very existence
of which he is skeptical about. There must
be strong reasons, not stated By him, which
hold him back from the Church. Then his
argument is not ingenious nor candid It is
one-sided It gives all the considerations
for and none of the considerations against
believing in Catholicism, which he admits he
does not belieye in himself. Perhaps the
word obedience IS is itself offensive to hun.
The London Spectator suggests that Mr.:
NALLocx rather Likes the position of patron
al ertra, and sbrinks from that OF obedience
o5 int7u to which he would have to- betake
himself if he were to be convinced
by his own arguments; and this view
of tho case seems borne out in part
by the context Of the article. However this
mar be, it is remarkable that a[r. AIA11ocK
has not been persuaded by his own srgu-
ments. AGR1PPA said unto Paul: almost
thou persusdest NE to be Christian" But
PAUL's appeal wes largely from his own e1-
perience. AGEPpA probably would not have
been moved at all if PAE1 had first reasoned
thus: For my own part I am liberal
skeptic,' though Christianity seems to me
the one existing religion capable Of appeas-
ing the religious condition of our time"
The fact is. it is not safe to take MAL1ock
seriously. He is mocker. As q mocker,
he has the advantage Of not having any great
reputation for consistency to defend IN
this respect he is better off than Prof TN
DALI, who, while sometimes protesting
mystical humility in approaching all the
great religious questions Of the day, ct other
times enunciatcs his views with dogmatic
severity. MA11oc7 is guilty Of precisely
the saneinconsistercy when he declares in one
breath that he does not believe in any religion,
and in anoster that the Catholic religion is
capable Of appealing to end appeasing the
religious condition Of OUT time. He virtually
declines to say whether he is believer Or
disbelieve-. and is in no respect more con-
sissent in this attitude than Prot TzSn1E
is in speaking both as . Waterfalls: and :.ea
iznma:erialist,' = i We may ba pardoaed the
latter, expression
Anothe- pa1t OF Mr.. MAz1ocE:s Lest Article