Morris tribune., 1885-01-28
1fmv sin be a great one, there is

in knowing that 1T is not
contagious, and will never become
dangerously prevalent.
Now, why am / ccnsured? How
was my unworthiness discovered, and
how proved?
Father Watry, while visiting, looks
over my miscellaneous books-a small
collection of twenty or thirty volumes.
He sees Hallam's History of the
Middle Ages among the cumberland
borrows it. The next Sunday, in
stead of preaching the sermon he
intended to, he makes few remarks
on his duties as pastor, discounte-
nances the reading of secular papers,
magazines and books, to the exclusion
Of religious papers, &c, states that
while recently calling on a Catholic
family he discovered several books
there, all written by professionals, per-
haps atheists; that Hallam was the
author of one, Macaulay of others, and
that the remaining books were like
wise protestant, poisonous and
trashy" The borrowed book Is then
taken in hand, the congregation is
told it is n very bad one, its title is
given, and without one word rs to its
scope, the statement is made that it is
hostile to the Church. 70 demon
strate the last assertion, Il sentence
previously marked-is read; another
sentence, on another page, ANA so on.
Comments are numerous and lengthy,
and it is repeatedly stated that the
one who owns the book reads this,
can not refute it, and believes it.
Now, not wishing to turn aside
from the main point to question of
etiquette, say nothing of the circum-
stances under which this book was
procured. 1t appears to me then,
that Father Watry should have in
formed his hearers what the work
under consideration is; that besides
the chapters he was about to read
| from. it contains others Oh the early
history of France, Spain, England,
and the Italian Republics; a chapter
on society, manners and customs, and
| two chapters on Feudai law. In pro-
ceeding as he did, it is impossible to
think that many listeners were not
misled. BY the exercise of very
little fairness, he could reasonably
suppose that l had the book for the
general historical information it con-
tanned, and that studied those por-
| tons of it that are interesting and
instructive to every lawyer, rather
| than the portions that assail my
religion. BY skillful employment
of the method adopted, the worst pro-
duction of the human mind could be
shown to be a valuable and noble
| performance and the best, contempt
IDLE and dangerous.
But admitting that Hallam is I'M
reliable; that he makes many false
charges against the church; that he
| repeats many stale calumnies, does it
follow that q reader, who is Catho-
lie, must believe these? Does belief,
as natural and necessary conse-
| quence, succeed the reading or hear
ing of Objectionable opinions? Ger
tainly not. Neither do men always
credulously swallow what they are
unable to refute. The presumption
that the owner Of a book approves it's
most pernicious doctrines, is astonish-
ing; an attempt to demonstrate that
he does so, must be wanting in that
thing called logic. The religion of a
| writer is simple, but hardly safe,
standard of merit. Those making a
special study of theology and eccle-
siastical history may do we'll to con-
fine themselves to authors having the
same creed. I have meyer seen list
of the reading matter, either pro-
scribed or recommended by the
Church, and am yet to learn what
proportion of good in a book should
preserve the whole from destruction.
[ say nothing in defense of Macaulay
and Hallam. The discovery that
their writings are trashy" is so
recent and curious that it may entirely
deprive them of the position they
have long occupied in the front rank
of English literature.
S. A. FLAHERTY.