ART. V.-OUR ATTITUDE TOWARD ROMAN CATHO

LICS.

I AM one of those who hold that the attitude of Protestants toward the Roman Catholic Church should not always and everywhere be hostile. It is not an enemy of mankind. We would all be sorry to see it suddenly blotted out of existence where a pure form of Protestantism could not take its place. It is surely better than no religion, or than any pagan religion, or than Christless Unitarianism. But I make no special plea for it, only for the truth. I am, I believe, as keenly alive to its faults as the most earnest anti-Catholic, and have put myself on record, in the pages of this Review and elsewhere, as a protestant against the tyranny of its system, the assumptions of its inerrant, triple-crowned ruler, and its perversions of biblical Christianity. But I remember, when I speak of its corruptions and its wide departure from the simplicity of apostolic Christianity, that Protestantism has its own blemishes, its own aberrations from the true faith; and where my convictions compel me to condemn I try not to condemn in passion and without discrimination, but to make the conclusion correspond with the facts. I seek to ascertain and measure my own prejudices and to make due allowance for the personal equation. For prejudice is persistent in the extreme and sadly bitter, blinding us unconsciously to truth and justice. It makes an almost fiendish use of the best of us sometimes.

Once more, to describe a little more fully the state of mind in which I endeavor to approach this important question, I am not so broad in my religious sympathies that I overlook the evil and magnify the good to be found in non-Christian systems, and I am not, therefore, led to claim nature worshipers, idolaters, and devotees of highly wrought philosophies as brethren in the Lord. I rejoice in our Parliament of Religions, not because it proved that there are some points in which all faiths agree, but because it brought Christianity into bold relief as the one divine religion, efficient and sufficient, and heir apparent to the kingdom of the world. A charity so broad that it would cover Hindooism, Buddhism, Mohammedanism, and Christianity with one mantle must first reduce Christianity to a Christless state. And what

is Christianity without the divine Christ and the supernatural? I try to keep my eyes open to the faults of the Church of Rome, as well as to its good features.

I think we should never allow ourselves to forget that the Church of Rome is a Christian Church. It ought not to be necessary to plead for such a concession; but there are not a few who hold that it is more pagan than Christian, and that the denunciations of the Apocalypse were meant to apply to it. I call it a Christian Church, because it accepts as devoutly as we the Gospel statement of the incarnation, the teachings, the miracles, the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ, and the fact of redemption by him and of salvation in his name. It believes in the same Bible, worships the same triune God, and holds as positively as do we to the immortality of the soul and to a state of bliss for the good and of misery for the evil after death. In its belief, so far as the great fundamental doctrines of Christianity are concerned, we cannot deny that it is orthodox. I call it a Christian Church, because it produces Christian fruits; and by its fruits, according to the Master's test, we may know it. With much else that seems foreign to the Gospel, we find in it constant devotion, burning zeal, and beautiful consecration. We see lives that are saintly in character, and a care for the orphan, the destitute, and the afflicted that compels our admiration. If we are often shocked by the immorality of professed Catholics, we find plenty of evidence of genuine piety. Most of us know Catholics who are conscientious in all their acts, strong in their faith in the merits of Christ, and very near to God in life. We do not forget that some of the hymns we love to sing for their devotional spirit were written by popes, cardinals, monks, and priests. What Protestant has given the world richer spiritual meditations than Thomas à Kempis, or more heavenly thoughts than Madame Swetchine, or sweeter hymns than the Bernards, Faber, and Newman? What Protestant missionaries have made larger sacrifices and put forth more heroic efforts for the conversion of the heathen than Xavier of India, Raymond Lull and Lavigerie of Africa, Le Caron of Canada, and De Smet and Marquette of the Mississippi valley? Catholic missionaries know how to die the martyr's death; and if a young Ohio Protestant girl, hoping for a long missionary service in India, yields a lovely life without a mur

mur to the care of a leprous community, Father Damien, criticise him as you will for imperfections, dies a leper's death cheerfully, and dies with the name of Christ on his lips. The evidence that the Catholic is a Christian Church, however corrupt, however far astray, seems to me overwhelming.

Be this as it may, we have to deal with the Roman Catholic Church as an established institution. We could not overthrow or banish it if we would. It is here in our midst and in great strength. It is active among millions of our fellow-citizens, who are thoroughly attached to it and who derive all the Christianity they possess from its teachings. The question is, What should be our attitude toward it?

I think our attitude toward it should be characterized by Christian courtesy. We should treat it with respect. We should not sneer at it, or abuse it, or fling opprobrious epithets at it. We ought to be able to differ with it on points of faith or practice without bursting into wholesale denunciation. It is venerable. It has come down to us, through long centuries, from apostolic times. During long periods of time it alone preserved Christianity on the earth. Our own succession as Protestants comes down the same stream, through the primitive and the Dark Ages to the Reformation, when the great divergence began. It is a better Church now than it was in Luther's time. It, too, has reformed, and the process will continue. We do no dishonor to ourselves by speaking of this great and venerable Church as respectfully as we can. We can show this respect, in one way, by calling the Church by its proper name. It has a definite title by which it desires to be known. It does not object to being spoken of as the Catholic Church, or the Church of Rome, or the Roman Church; but it does resent the terms "Romish" Church, or "Popish" or "Papistical " Church. The use of these objectionable words is pretty constant practice among us; and, while it is often the result of mere thoughtlessness, it not seldom marks the attitude of the mind as one of contempt. We may insist that Catholics are oversensitive; but let the tables be turned and see how we would feel ourselves. We are Methodists, for example, and own Wesley as the founder of our movement; but we would not like to be called Wesleyites. We have a right to our own proper name and description, and those who would treat us with

respect must be mindful of them. We can differ with Roman Catholics, and contend earnestly with them for our own views of the truth, without descending to the use of terms indicating contempt. This may seem a sinall point, but if we would be careful always to pay heed to it our discussions would be raised to a higher plane; and this would be no trifling matter.

Some zealous controversialists take a singular delight in rabid and indiscriminate denunciation of the Church of Rome. They are fond of identifying its headship with the "scarlet woman" of the Book of Revelation, and of insisting that it is the mother of abominations. They believe that it represents the spirit of anti-Christ. Such expressions always make me shudder, as I would shudder at some shocking irreverence or awful blasphemy. I do not undertake now to say how we should interpret these scriptural terms; I only say that I see no warrant whatever for applying them to the Catholic Church or its head. It is a harsh, unchristian judgment, contrary to the positive declaration of Christ that he that is not against us is for us. A large body of Lutherans makes it an article of faith to identify the pope as "anti-Christ," not on personal grounds, but because of his official headship. Think of denouncing as a source of abominations a Church which, with all its faults and scandals, exalts the name and merits of Jesus Christ as the divine Saviour of the world!

We should strive to divest ourselves of our prejudices against Catholics and the Catholic Church. Many of us drew them in with every breath we breathed in the atmosphere of our youth, and have fed them upon a class of literature of scandalous character, such as inflamed and unprincipled writers and unscrupulous publishers put into the market. I have at this moment under my eye a flaring circular of the most sensational character, with shameful. pictures conveying the slanderous imputation that priests and nuns are wickedly immoral, and that the confessional is a sink of iniquity. But we know well enough, when we reflect, that such scandals are not monopolized by Catholics. When infidels have tried to make it appear that the offenses of certain well-known Protestant ministers against purity are common to, if not characteristic of, Protestantism, we have resented it with indignation. Prejudice receives such imputations with eager readiness, and we have

A Methodist minister of

reason to be slow to condemn. Scotch birth once told me that, in his early childhood, he had a most terrible fear of Catholics. He had heard such stories

of their wickedness and cruelty that he believed they had horns and were not like other people. I remember a young country girl, just in her teens, who was greatly shocked on discovering that a little friend, whose acquaintance she made on a visit to a relative in a city, was a Catholic. "Why," said she, with genuine surprise evident in manner and tone, "I thought Grace was a nice girl." From that moment she lost all interest in her playmate, who was a Catholic and, therefore, could not be nice. A Presbyterian minister says his little girl has been boycotted by many of her former associates because she is friendly with a young Catholic. They told her that if she would not give up her Catholic friend they would not play with her any more. Her father thought the Catholic companionship suitable, and would not advise his daughter to yield to the unconscious bigotry of her young friends. We all know that such instances are numerous, and they are not creditable to our intelligence and fairness. They indicate how rank is the prejudice with which thousands of Protestants are imbued— prejudice not confined to children, or even to the lay element, but fully developed in ministers, Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Lutheran, etc. This rooted prejudice will not allow us to see the Catholic Church as it is or judge of it fairly; but it predisposes us to believe every damaging statement and discount every favorable one concerning it. It is no defense to say that Catholics have a like prejudice toward Protestantism. No doubt they have. They condemn us more roundly than we condemn them, and are more ready, perhaps, to believe the worst said of us. But two wrongs do not make a right; and the wrong we do may be less excusable in us, because it is done under greater light.

This prejudice of ours, which we too often mistake for a virtuous indignation, makes us quite willing to believe the worst reports respecting Catholics and Catholicism. For example, many believed that the false encyclical circulated a few years ago as the utterance of the pope was genuine, notwithstanding the fact that its spurious character was evident on the face of it. Common sense must convince anyone who reads it with