to hope and the sectarian to fear, when the church threatens to supplant the meetinghouse, and the cross the weathercock that turns with every wind, serious alarm is felt, and the shout rings through the land, Down with religious liberty! A party is organized for its suppression, chiefly in the persons of Catholics. Already has this party, led on and excited by grave Calvinistic divines, burned some of our churches, seminaries, and convents, fired our dwellings, and shot down our people in the streets. Already has the wild shout of exultation broke from the citizens - not the rabble, but well dressed citizens of Philadelphia, on beholding the cross, the emblem of man's salvation, fall from St. Augustine's church, and become the prey of devouring flames; "a yell," as an eyewitness expressed it, "that was no doubt echoed in hell, and heard, too, in heaven." All over the land, this liberticide party, for he who denies liberty of conscience kills liberty herself, in the sacred name of liberty, yes, liberty of the state to bind the free conscience, is establishing its presses, employing its demagogues and colporteurs to scatter the foulest falsehoods broadcast, forming its leagues and its associations for preparing the public mind to suppress the freedom of Catholic worship. The facts glare us in the face. We see them everywhere. We read them in every anti-Catholic press; we hear them in every anti-Catholic sermon; we smell their stench in every anti-Catholic book and pamphlet. There is no denying it. We tell our brethren, nay, we tell the friends of religious liberty, of every denomination, that a deadly blow is aimed at freedom of conscience. The old Calvinistic tyranny over conscience rears anew its crushed head and spits its venom, and we must decide which we will have, CALVINISM AND THE SLAVERY OF CONSCIENCE, or CATHOLICITY AND

FREEDOM OF WORSHIP.

This is no idle declamation. Our brethren may be assured, that a deadly blow, in the attack on their worship, is aimed at the freedom of conscience itself, and that here, as in every Protestant country, we are to be placed under ban of the law, or at best to exercise our worship only by the mere sufferance of the state. Yet we are unwilling to believe the enemies of religious liberty will succeed. When we feel the breeze that comes freely and joyously over our native hills, when we look out of our window and see the monument which marks the spot where Warren fell, when we remember that Catholic treasure and Catholic blood, as well as Protestant, were poured out to win our national independence, that it was a Catholic monarch who was our generous ally, who furnished us with men and means to terminate successfully the war of the Revolution, and that in more than half of the States of this Union the cross had been planted before the Protestant adventurer came, we confess it is hard to persuade ourselves that the demagogues and maddened bigots will succeed in sup

pressing religious liberty, in bringing our rich and noble country under a government that will tyrannize over conscience, and thus overturn the proudest monument of our fathers' glory. But numbers are against us, and we may be outvoted; but, nevertheless, God is for us, and we will not fear whatever may be against us. We can die; and, dying, win the victory.

As to Mr. Stephen Harrington's cant about the Bible, it will suffice to say, that, if he would read and understand the Bible better, reverence and practise its teachings more truly, and spend less precious breath in praising it and in calumniating Catholics, he would be both a better Christian and a better citizen. If the Holy Father anathematizes Protestant Bible societies, he only proves himself the faithful shepherd of the flock. Even many Protestants themselves denounce the Bible societies, and we, when a Protestant, published some curious facts about them which we may have occasion to republish. There is some difference between anathematizing the sectarian machines called Bible societies and prohibiting the circulation of a book which Protestants facetiously call the Bible, and opposing the printing, circulating, and reading the Holy Scriptures, the word of God. When Protestants shall have the Bible to circulate, and shall in good faith circulate it, and not, under pretence of circulating the word of God, circulate their own word, perhaps they will meet with less opposition from the Holy Father.

Catholics in this country and in others may be ignorant; but Mr. Stephen Harrington will need to travel far before he finds a Catholic as ignorant of what constitutes the gentleman and the Christian as himself. As a general thing, the mass of the people are better educated in Catholic countries than they are in Protestant countries. The Austrian system of education is superior to the Prussian, the French to the Scottish, and the provisions for education in the Papal States are far superior to what they are in New England. The Irish are as well educated, to say the least, as the English, and that they are not better educated is owing to Protestant tyranny and oppression, which made it a high penal offence for a Catholic father to teach his children even letters and science. For years, the Irish were obliged to choose between religion without education, and education without religion. It is to their credit that they did not choose the latter. Ignorant as Catholics may be, they have no reason to blush for their ignorance in the presence of Protestants.

That the Holy Father expends vast sums in educating the children of Protestants we should be glad to believe, for we really think it would be a deed of charity to give the children of Protestants a better education than they now get. But we think Mr. Harrington must be misinformed; for Dr. Bacon, we believe it was, told us, at the late anniversary of the Christian Alliance So

ciety, that the Pope is quite poor and can't pay his debts. If this be so, he can hardly send out hundreds of thousands to educate the children of Protestants. That Protestants do send their children sometimes to Catholic schools is undoubtedly true; but they are not obliged to do so; and when they do, it is of their own accord, because they prefer our schools to any they have of their own. If we establish better schools than the Protestants, under more accomplished and trustworthy teachers, really it cannot be regarded as our fault.

That Catholics, in establishing and multiplying schools, to the full extent of their means, in this country, have some ulterior object in view, there can be no doubt. They hope to make this whole country Catholic, without a single heretic in it. We are all laboring in our several ways, as we have opportunity, to this end, though not with half the zeal and energy that could be wished; for Catholics, in the midst of Protestants, too often experience the truth of the proverb, that "evil communications corrupt good manners." Nevertheless, we hold our Church is God's Church, and that whoso would enter into the kingdom of heaven must enter through it; and charity to God and man must necessarily make us somewhat active. Our schools, colleges, and seminaries are, unquestionably, all intended to further the cause of Catholicity, to promote Christian knowledge and virtue, and, if possible, to add to the number that are to be saved. That the Holy Father takes an interest in our doings, that his heart is gladdened when he sees the rose planted in the wilderness and living waters gush out in the thirsty land, we can believe; for he is the faithful shepherd, to whom has been committed the care of the whole flock.

That we are the "selected tool" of the Pope in this work is not true; but we wish it was. We seek no higher honor on earth than to be employed by him in any service he may judge us fit. for. We reverence him as the chief pastor of the Church, as the vicar of Christ on earth, and we shall never feel aggrieved by being told that we are selected to be his tool.

We are not so much troubled about the "reward" we are likely to receive as our Protestant friends appear to be. It is remarkable how unable Protestants are to conceive it possible for a man to do any thing except from hope of some earthly reward. The idea, that a man can act from conviction, from a sense of duty, from an earnest desire to obey God and save his own soul from the flames of hell, strikes them as preposterous, and they seek to explain his conduct by imagining some paltry bribe of money or of worldly distinction. Nothing is more true than that, in judging others, we are sure to judge ourselves. In imagining low and unworthy motives for the conduct of others, when elevated and worthy ones are possible, we but betray our own low and unworthy tendencies. Whether we shall or shall not meet a "just recompense

of reward" from the American people is a matter of small moment. We have had some trials, in the course of a short and troublous life; but we have not, and never have had, any cause to complain of the treatment we have personally received at the hands of our countrymen. They have thus far treated us personally with great generosity, far better than we have deserved, and they have borne from us what they would have borne as well from few others. We have no fear but they will continue to treat us as well as, if not even better than, we deserve. We know our countrymen well. We have no respect for the religion professed by the majority of them; but there is good stuff in the American mind and heart, - only it has been a little spoiled in the making up. Our countrymen will use, even promote, the time-server, the trimmer, the man without principle,

for he is the man who will do their bidding; but they despise him in their hearts. They will bluster a little at the man who contradicts them, tells them unpalatable truths, or treads on their corns; but at the same time they honor him who speaks from honest conviction, from a sense of duty, plainly, boldly, independently, what he sincerely holds to be true and important. Very few of them, after all, are Stephen Harringtons. As much as we are obliged to scold our countrymen, we cannot help having a lurking respect for them; and we are sure that we never enjoyed their confidence and respect so much before we became a Catholic as we have since. Would to God they would pay half the respect to the Catholic faith which they do and will to its unworthy advocate.

1.- History of the Life, Works, and Doctrines of John Calvin. From the French of J. M. V. AUDIN. Baltimore: J. Murphy. Louisville: Webb & Brother. 1845. 8vo. pp. 502.

THE high reputation M. Audin acquired by his learned, brilliant, and fascinating Life of Luther will not suffer, but be enhanced, by this volume on the life, works, and doctrines of Calvin. Luther was an attractive subject; a real German, vacillating between the angel and the demon, the man and the beast, but with the human generally prodominating. At times we can hardly help admiring him, giving a tear to his tenderness, or a smile to his comical lies and coarse jokes; and M. Audin, we think, in his sympathy with what was human in his character, has now and then carried his admiration a little too far, and has painted him in a light too favorable, and colors too attractive, for strict historical truth. We think he also treats Philip Melancthon quite too tenderly. We have less charity for Philip than for brother Martin. Luther, we doubt not, was really insane. It seems to us impossible to explain the contradictions in his character,

his cunning, artfulness, falsehoods, bitter defiance of all that is sacred or moral, and his apparent frankness, bluntness, earnestness, and sincerity, on the hypothesis of his perfect sanity. His reason and imagination were evidently disordered,-whether enough so to relieve him of moral accountability, we undertake not to decide; but at least enough so to soften in some degree the severity of our censures. We feel, as we read his life, more disposed to compassionate the man than to denounce the heretic and schismatic. But with Melancthon we feel differently. He may have been of a gentler make than Luther, less rough and violent in his passions; but he labored all his lifetime to uproot a faith which he could never in his heart fully deny to be the true faith, and to overthrow a Church which he always secretly felt was the Church of God. We look upon him as a man weak enough to suffer himself to be overpowered by Luther, and base enough to act against his honest convictions. We have no excuse for him. If he at times regretted what he had done, and sighed for the Church against which he had dared raise his parricidal hand, we give him no credit for his sighs and regrets; for they did not work repentance, did not lead him to forsake the evil of his ways.

But with this Life of Calvin we have no similar fault to find. Calvin was a less attractive subject; though his influence in fixing the character of the Reformation, in giving it, as it were, a constitution, and preserving it, for a time, was greater and is historically more important than Luther's. Calvin would never have attempted the Reformation; but without him the schism effected by Luther would soon have dwindled away, and the disaffected would have made their peace with the Church. Of all the Reformers, Calvin was the only one who had a constructive and conservative genius; and he is the real father of Protestantism in its organic form, as distinguished from mere revolt and license. He was not a theologian, was not a priest, was never in holy orders; he was a lawyer, and a lawyer struggling to legalize revolt, and to give law to what was an insurrection against all law. In this struggle he showed very considerable ability, and a dogged resolution. But as a man, we cannot admire him, can feel no sympathy with him. When we meet Luther, with his cronies, at the "Black Eagle," roaring out, as they strike their glasses,

"Wer nicht liebt Wein, Weiber und Gesang,

Der bleibt ein Narr sein Lebenlang,"

we feel that he at least belongs to the human family; but when we meet John Calvin, we feel that it is no one of the race of mortals, but the fiend in human shape. Neither in authentic history nor in works of fiction have we met a more truly fiendish character, one in which there was so little with which a true, frank-hearted man could sympathize, or in any sense approve.

It is remarkable, too, how completely Calvin impressed his own personal character on his religion and his followers. When we read, in the pages of M. Audin, the history of his proceedings at Geneva, we seem, allowance made for the difference of circumstances, to be reading a chapter from the early history of our own New England; not, indeed, in the pages of Mr. Bancroft, but in the annals of the times, or in Miss Sedgwick's Hope Leslie, or in Cooper's Wept of the Wish-ton-Wish; for these two works of fiction are preferable, on some points, as authentic history, to the eloquent work of the historian, who sees all things in the warm sunlight of his own imagination, and writes his history on the principle, the people can do no wrong, and of praising all sects and denominations, now the Calvinists,