I

SCHOLARS' CORRESPONDENCE.

AM frequently challenged to show any evidence that this is of practical educational value, and in reply give the facts that fresh lists are continually received from most schools where the correspondence has been tried, that other people and other countries are following our example, and that letters of a nature similar to the following often find their way to the office :

Ontario, January 27th, 1899. Dear Sir,-Our students who have been fortunate enough to secure correspondents are quite enthusiastic and are envied by those who are less fortunate. The circle is growing wider, however, as some have secured correspondents through the kindly offices of French boys to whom their names were sent by those who were first put into communication through the REVIEW OF REVIEWS. So far as I have been able to observe, I think the effect of the scheme has not been confined to those who are now carrying on this correspondence. I have noticed a growing interest in the subject of French especially among our junior pupils, who hope some day to be able also to correspond with their French comrades, and who, therefore, are more desirous of fitting themselves to do their part creditably. The French exercises are becoming less of a task and more of a pleasure. Of those who are actually corresponding, our French teacher says that he notices not only added interest but a marked improvement in the character of the work done in class. There is much greater attention to details than before, and the necessity for this is often accentuated by the errors in the use of English sometimes made by the French boys. Many other good results are flowing from this plan, of which I mention but a few: (1) a more exact knowledge of foreign peoples; (2) a greater sympathy with those not of our kin, and a greater toleration of "foreigners"; to the average Canadian, those not English are next to heathen; (3) a wider outlook; (4) a deeper humility at their own ignorance.-Yours sincerely, W. H, B.A.

EXCHANGE OF HOMES.

There are naturally many more difficulties in the way when an exchange of visits is concerned than in the case of a simple exchange of letters; but, if all goes well, the former is, of course, much more valuable, both for pleasure and profit, than the latter. We have urgent entreaties from Frenchmen and Italians to arrange such exchange for their sons with our boys; but distance and our national shyness and distrust of strangers hinder rapid progress here. The following letters are too valuable a testimony to be condemned to the wastepaper basket. The first is from an English father, who writes :

We have had the pleasure of entertaining during last August and September two highly-cultured young ladies, who soon became great favourites in our social circle, were most agreeable, and furnished us with countless new ideas on general matters. They also systematically helped my girls in acquiring a fuller knowledge of the French language, and at the close of their visit my daughters accompanied them home, and had a very pleasant two months' holiday in France. I consider the whole matter has been most satisfactory, and am hoping some time to receive another such visit.

The following is the translation of part of a letter received from France :

Thanks to you, we were enabled to accomplish our English visit under the most favourable conditions. To appreciate a country and its people one must enjoy its real, that is to say, its family life. A traveller, rapidly visiting the principal sights and towns of a country, taking refuge in hotels or pensions,

with their cosmopolitan atmosphere, cannot appreciate properly its manners and customs. In the R- family we had the most delightful reception, and, whilst making rapid progress in English, learnt to appreciate the charm, well-being and high tone of family life in England. When we arrived in London we were received at the station by a delightful young English lady who knew our language well. Not having had practice in speaking English, we should have come off very badly as regards our luggage, etc., without her. When we reached her home every one overwhelmed us with kindness; but, alas! we could hardly understand a word. My sister, who is quicker than 1, soon, however, picked up a few words, not being so much embarrassed by the stupid shyness which prevents one trying to speak a foreign language for fear one's odd expressions might be laughed at. The R- -s were equally ready to try and express themselves in French, and by the end of the week we had got so far as to exchange opinions on the " Affaire Dreyfus," which excites so much discussion in England, where the money and influence of Jesuits and Jews is so little understood. But we soon left this difficult subject, and found plenty to talk about in our different customs, manners, and, above all, educational systems. Once more I must repeat my thanks, and express my satisfaction at the cordial reception we met with, and trust our hosts will be as satisfied with their return visit.

NOTICES.

The editor of La Vita Internazionale, of Milan, earnestly appeals to the young men of Great Britain to come forward and join hands with young Italians eager to know more of British ways and British people, and desires to co-operate with us, as does the Revue Universitaire, in France. He would also gladly promote an exchange of homes between Italians and Englishspeaking people.

The General Secretary of the French Sunday School Union, whose wife is the daughter of the famous d'Aubigné, author of "The History of the Reformation," proposes to open a summer holiday home for schoolboys a lovely part of Canton Vaud. Pastor Bieler d'Aubigné thinks that Protestants in England, France and Germany will be glad to know of his idea. During June and July both girls and boys will be received. The months of August and September are reserved for boys only. Terms, about £8 per month.

Our readers are reminded that we are often able to supply addresses to those who wish to visit France, Germany or Switzerland, and we are especially asked to mention Paris, Lausanne, Tours and Amiens.

A young lady at Helsingfors hopes some English girl of seventeen or eighteen will correspond with her in English or Swedish.

Last month a notice was given that two Spaniards desired correspondents. More than fifteen applications were received, and of course only two could get satisfactory replies.

Will our friends remember that adult applicants should send one shilling towards the expense entailed in obtaining correspondents, and should always mention age and occupation.

M. Mieille hopes an engagement au pair can be found for the son of a schoolmaster in Paris, or that an exchange of homes for a few months can be effected. The Parisian would take either a girl or a boy in lieu of his son. He also recommends a German lady who desires to find an appointment in the South of England-either as governess or companion.

A young Dane would like a correspondent.

A

BOOK becomes the book of the month sometimes because it was published during the month, but at other times because it is suddenly brought before the public mind by some circumstance which gives it a position of prominence to which it would otherwise not have been entitled either by its intrinsic merits or by the date of its publication. "The Life of Father Hecker," which is emphatically the book of the month, was published years ago. The volume now before us is the second edition published in New York by the Columbus Press, and bears the date of 1894; and there have been numerous editions and translations published in Europe since that date. The reason why this Life of the good American priest is the book of the month is because the Pope has made it so. Last month he published a letter to Cardinal Gibbons in the Osservatore Romano, which is devoted entirely to this Life of Father Hecker, of which it is at once a partial condemnation and a great advertisement. No one who has not been in Rome and has not been immersed in the fierce controversies which have eddied round the issue raised by the Life and Writings of Father Hecker, can have any idea as to the interest excited by the Papal deliberations. To the ordinary outsider, the Pope's letter to Cardinal Gibbons may seem but a more or less balanced utterance, carefully framed for the purpose of averting any definite expression of opinion on either side; but the mere fact that it is so indefinite and unbalanced is full of significance, for, to speak profanely of such exalted matters, the Pope has been sitting on the fence a long time on this subject of Americanism. Desperate efforts were made to pull his leg so as to make him descend on either side of the fence. For more than a year past few questions have been debated so eagerly and with such passionate conviction of their intrinsic importance as the question which of the legpullers would prevail so far as to induce the Pope to alight on their side; and now at last, when we have the Pope's letter and turn to it eagerly to see what his decision has been, we find his Holiness still sitting sedately on the topmost rail of the fence. He had one leg on either side when the controversy began, and where he was, there he remains. For the present, at any rate, Americanists and anti-Americanists will be free to fight it out among themselves, and that in itself for the Americanists is a great gain. The Pope still sits on the fence. It is impossible to pretend that the Americanist doctrines have been the subject of Pontifical censure; and as what is not forbidden may be regarded as permitted, I am disposed to believe that Mr. Costello is right when he maintains that the letter of the Pope marks the defeat of a long and bitter intrigue against Americans at the Vatican.

"The Life of Father Hecker," by the Rev. Walter Elliott. Columbus Press, New York, 1894. Second Edition.

II.

When I returned from Europe last autumn I was more impressed with the magnitude of the issues bound up in this question of Americanism than I was even in the possibilities of the Peace Conference. No one could dip even cursorily into the Americanist controversy without feeling that it was quite possible the world and the Church were standing on the verge of a religious movement fraught with issues which might affect the destinies of mankind as mightily as those which were raised by Luther and the Reformers who preceded him. It would do Sir William Harcourt a world of good to spend a month or two at the Vatican studying Americanism and its issues. It is impossible for any one who has looked at the affairs of the world from a place which for 2,000 years has been the nerve-centre of the human race not to feel the comparative insignificance of the trivialities which from time to time create storms in the Anglican teacup. When you leave the arena in which are being debated issues affecting the whole future drift, scope and spirit of a Church whose dioceses surround the planet, and descend to the banalities of the controversy as to the number of candles to be lighted before the altar of a parish church, it is as if you had left the tremendous gorges and snow-clad summits of the Himalayas in order to sojourn among the molehills in an English meadow. For what is Americanism? Americanism is the attempt of the English-speaking world to assert its supremacy over the Latin races in the governance and guidance of the Roman Church. Broadly speaking, the Latin races, with the Roman law which they inherited from the Empire of the Cæsars, stand for the principle of authority in which the State is everything and the individual nothing. On the other hand, the Englishspeaking race, which has found the most complete logical expression of its political ideals in the American Constitution, stands for the principle of individuality and of liberty. Hitherto the Roman Church has been dominated not merely by the Latin races, but still more by the conception of the dominance of the State which it inherited from pagan Rome. Under the title of Americanism, the English-speaking race, approaching the subject from the opposite pole, pleads for liberty as against authority, and is endeavouring to permeate and revolutionise the Roman Church with what are popularly called "American" principles. To the reactionary Catholic of the Latin School, Americanism is merely the latest and most insidious form of the evil genius of Protestantism. Americanism, indeed, has been denounced time and again as nothing more nor less than Protestantism in disguise, a secret traitor sapping its way into the very innermost arcanum of the Church. On the other hand, the Ameri

canists exultantly proclaim that the future belongs to them, and that they are destined sooner or later to transform the spirit of the Church, and in readjusting it to the altered conditions of the new time achieve for Catholicity its final and decisive triumph. Both parties have agreed to make "The Life of Father Hecker" their battle-ground, about which they have fought out their controversy, and the question of the condemnation or of the approbation of "The Life of Father Hecker" has been the issue around which the battle has raged. Father Hecker has been lauded as a saint and he has been denounced as a heretic. Although the Life was published with the episcopal imprimatur, a volume which was more or less a malignant attack upon his memory was published under equally high auspices; and for a long time it seemed very doubtful as to which faction would succeed in securing the final victory. From the Pope's letter to Cardinal Gibbons, it would seem that Leo XIII. has displayed his customary shrewdness. His letter is a dexterous egg-dance, executed with his naturally inherited and acquired dexterity. The full text of the letter has not yet reached me, but, judging from the telegraphic reports which have appeared in the English press, it would seem that he has ingeniously evaded the difficulty in which he was placed by proclaiming that he has nothing to say about Americanism if Americanism is intended to convey an adaptation to the qualities peculiar to Americans—their habits and their customs; but if this word signifies opinions contained in "The Life of Father Hecker,” he is certain that the American bishops will be the first to reject them. Those opinions which are to be condemned he proceeds to specify and to censure. The Times correspondent at the Vatican, Monsignor Stanley, speaking of the Pope's letter, says:

The long-expected letter from the Pope to Cardinal Gibbons on the subject which, rightly or wrongly, has been styled "Americanism," appears to-night (February 21st) in the Osservatore Romano.

The Pope begins with laudatory words to Cardinal Gibbons and the American Catholics, and, alluding to the many proofs of his goodwill which he has given them in the past, he wishes them to see in this document another proof of his affection for America, while he makes it clear that his present letter is one of warning and correction. He then speaks of the controversies which have arisen out of "The Life of Isaac Hecker," to which, it will be remembered, Archbishop Ireland wrote a preface which has been much commented upon, and which has been translated into various languages. The Pope is careful to distinguish between the doctrinal aspects of the new theories and questions of practical discipline. He strongly urges the impossibility of any change in the former, while admitting that the necessity has always been recognised and acted upon by the Church of adapting certain points of discipline to the requirements of the time. It rests with the Church, however, and not with individuals, to determine how and when any such adaptations can be made. To say otherwise would be to share in the condemnation of the seventy-eighth proposition of the Synod of Pistoja. The Pope subsequently repudiates as untenable the principle that the definition of Papal infallibility by the Vatican Council affords to individuals greater freedom of thought and action.

The Pope is careful to say that he by no means repudiates all true progress of modern thought and civilisation, which he welcomes as conducive to human prosperity; but for it to be really useful it must not lose sight of the authority and the teaching of the Church. He combats the theory that to-day the internal inspiration of the Holy Ghost has not to reckon with outward guidance. He rejects the theory which would ascribe to natural gifts a superiority over supernatural virtues.

The Pope points out and condemns another error in the distinction advocated by the innovators between active and

passive virtues, for all virtues must be necessarily active. He does not allow that some virtues are suitable to one time and others to another time, for Christ, the supreme Model and Master of all sanctity, is ever the same, and does not change in the progress of centuries. Humility, obedience, and selfdenial are as necessary now as before. The contempt shown by these innovators for what they are pleased to call passive virtues has, naturally, led to a contempt of the religious life as suited only to the weak and as an impediment to Christian perfection and the good of the community. This error the Pope energetically condemns, and declares it to be injurious to the religious orders and in contradiction to history. He reminds Americans of what they owe to religious orders, both active and contemplative.

The Pope concludes by saying that if by "Americanism" is meant the peculiarity of laws, customs and characteristics which is to be found in America, as in every nation, he sees no reason against the expression; but if by this word is meant the errors he has condemned above, he is convinced that the American Episcopate will reject the term as injurious to themselves and the whole nation, for it would lead to the conclusion that the Church in America is different from what she is in other countries, and this would be incompatible with her unity and with the prerogatives of the See of Peter.. The letter bears date January 22nd.

The average man will not concern himself very much as to the differences of opinion which prevailed between the Pope and the disciples of Father Hecker as to the scope of the action of the Holy Spirit in the individual soul. That he will regard as a mystical question which can be discussed by theologians. Neither will he bestow much attention upon the Pope's condemnation of the error of distinguishing between active and passive virtues. Father Hecker was a sensible, practical, pushing American, thoroughly imbued with a sense of the importance of the active virtues, and occasionally given to speaking contemptuously of those idle folk who find a convenient cloak for the indulgence of their torpid disposition in the practice of the passive virtues of prayer and meditation. It is even on record that Father Hecker, one time when a young priest complained that he wanted to get back to Italy because he could find no time in New York to pray, said to him: "Don't be such a baby. See how much work there is to be done here. Is it not much better to make some return to God here in your own country for what he has done for you rather than to be sucking your thumbs abroad? What kind of piety do you call that?" The piety which sucks its thumbs in idleness and imagines that it is serving God thereby finds more favour, it would seem, in the Vatican than it did with Father Hecker. But that also is a matter on which the average man has made up his own mind, and will not be disturbed by the polemics of the encyclical. The third point is concerned with the relations between the Church and the State, and upon this it would be interesting to see exactly the terms in which the Pope defines his attitude. The Papacy from of old time has been a great advocate of the closest possible relations between Church and State, based upon the ascendency of the Church, which makes the State more or less its handmaid. The Americanists of necessity are unable to accept this Old World dogma as an article of faith. They see that in their own country they are living under a constitution which has been blessed by the Pope and which declares that Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This, which seems to the rigid reactionary Catholic sufficient to justify the denunciation of the American Constitution as godless, has seemed to many devout Catholics in America the

true way out of the difficulties which surround the Church with embarrassments in the Old World. When I was in Rome I was told that the Pope would admit that the separation of the Church and State was permissible in America owing to the circumstances of the country, but that the Americans were on no account to conclude that they had come upon a principle which was capable of universal application. The Americans may keep their peculiar institutions for themselves, but they must not export them to the European market, otherwise they will get into trouble with the jealous protectionist who reigns at the Vatican. The Americans, however, although temporarily defeated in their attempt to infuse American principles into the somewhat torpid body of the Catholic Church, will not be cast down. They maintain that, whatever may be the theory, in practice the American system works, at least, as well as any other, for nowhere is the action more free than in the United States and the exercise of Pontifical authority more untrammelled. The Church lives entirely under her own freely made laws. The relations of the Bishops with the Holy See are direct and unhampered, and the exercise of the authority of the Pope is immediate and uncontrolled. We may expect, therefore, that the controversy over Americanism will rage more fiercely than ever, and the Americans, whether Catholics or Protestants, are not quick to accept a temporary check on one line of advance as equivalent to the loss of a pitched battle. They are, indeed, like the race from which they sprang, much more disposed to take it out of their adversary by increased activity all along the line. We shall hear a good deal more of Americanism because of the Pope's encyclical than we have heard of it for a long time past.

III.

Before giving a sketch of the life and opinions of Father Hecker, it may be well to string together some extracts from three notable utterances on the subject by eminent Catholics. The first is that which Mr. Costello contributed to the Daily Chronicle on February 23rd. Mr. Costello is an intelligent Catholic who knows Rome better than most Englishmen, and whose narrative shows his acquaintance with the salient facts of the controversy, which is now likely to attain much greater importance in the eyes of the world::

The Vatican has for months been besieged by heresy-hunters who were eager to prove to the Pope that the "forward school" of American Catholics, and in particular Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop Ireland, Archbishop Keane, Monsignor O'Connell, Dr. Zahm, and many others allied with them, were tainted with heterodoxy. And, on the other hand, the Vatican has been well aware that these men were the real "live force" of the remarkable Roman Catholic movements in America, and that any condemnation which involved them would be dangerous.

The difficulty is of long standing. The first serious conflict arose in the troubles concerning the Labour and land questions, which involved the episcopal condemnation of the "Knights of Labour," and the revolt of Rev. Dr. McGlynn, of New York. In these differences, Archbishop Corrigan, who is a man of high character and intelligence, but an ultra-conservative in opinion, became the chief of the "anti-progressive party in the Catholic-American world. On the other hand, Cardinal Gibbons-a man of strong popular and Labour sympathies, and a warm friend of Cardinal Manning-led the forward movement, and succeeded by his personal intervention at Rome in having the censure on the Knights of Labour set aside, and Dr. McGlynn himself restored.

Soon after came further differences over the new Washington University. The New York diocese was undoubtedly disappointed at seeing the educational centre pass away to Washington,

and it is said that the Jesuit Society shared the same feeling. The University was, however, started and was organised on very modern lines by Dr. Keane, who had the support of a majority of the Bishops. After a time, intrigues of an obscure characte arose, in which oddly enough the German Catholics played a part; and Dr. Keane was suddenly recalled to Rome, to the dismay of the "forward" party, and the great indignation of those who knew his value to the University. It was no doubt intended at that time to make a clean sweep of the forward element in the professoriate, and to make the University much less "American" and much more like the old-fashioned Roman Catholic teaching centres in countries like Spain or Austria. The forward party, who had been taken by surprise, rallied their forces, and with the aid of Dr. Keane's own explanations at the Vatican, they stopped, and in fact reversed, the reaction. Dr. Keane was raised to an Archbishopric, and given a Canony at the Lateran, and he has since been a powerful agent of 'Americanism at Rome itself. A Rector of ability was

appointed in his stead, and the difficulty passed by.

Then arose the final conflict. Father Hecker-a remarkable man of German origin, who was, I believe, trained in the English Church, and who afterwards, as one of the early converts to Rome, became a Redemptorist priest at Claphamwent to America with the conviction that he had a kind of apostolic mission to present Romanism in a new way to the American people. He may be described as a kind of Roman Salvationist, and, like the Salvation Army, he shocked many old-fashioned people, and had a remarkable success. In the end he became the founder of a new religious Order, called the Paulists, who are still carrying on his work. A life of Father Hecker, containing many of his intimate sayings and writings, was published not long ago in America with an appreciative preface by Archbishop Ireland himself. Some of the startling things it contained raised protests from theologians of the conservative school, and the fight began again over the body of Father Hecker.

This Life was translated into French by the Abbé Klein, of Paris, who is one of the most "forward" of the French clergy— among whom a forward school has for many years been growing -and the translation brought the battle over to Europe. At the Roman Catholic Congress, at Fribourg in 1897, there were hot debates on the subject, in one of which a French VicarGeneral described Father Hecker as an apostle, while a French Bishop practically denounced him as a dangerous heretic. Ever since, theological pamphlets and discussions have kept the controversy alive. The ultra-conservative school, especially in France, have been keenly anxious to have " Americanism" condemned root and branch as an unsafe and spurious view of Catholicism; while the Americans have been fighting for the right, as they say, "to state Catholic doctrine in language adapted to the modern time and to the American environment."

The Papal document, which was withheld till Leo XIII. could have a personal conference with Archbishop Ireland, is intended to terminate the discussion, and, while it diplomatically concedes something to each party, it leaves the real victory with "Americanism." But the real point of the Pope's epistle is to insist that American Catholicism cannot have any different dogmas from Catholicism elsewhere, though under due ecclesiastical authority the large body of usages which are technically known as 66 discipline" may be modified; and, saving that, to allow that the American episcopate and clergy may be as "American" as they please. This latitude will probably satisfy not only Cardinal Gibbons and Archbishop Ireland, but the Paulists. "The Times Vatican correspondent," Monsignor Stanley, who is well known to be no friend of advanced views, describes it in colourless terms; but their "Roman" correspondent more correctly points out that it means the defeat of a long and bitter intrigue.

My second extract is from the pamphlet which more than anything else helped to make Father Hecker and his life the battleground of Americanism. There are few more remarkable prelates in Rome than Monsignor D. J. O'Connell, formerly rector of the American College, and still resident in Rome. At the International Catholic and

Scientific Congress at Fribourg, Monsignor O'Connell with the instinct of a journalist seized upon the idea of linking an exposition of Americanism to the Life of Father Hecker, which was at that time attracting widespread attention in the Church owing to the high character and influence of the devoted man who had founded the order of Paulists in the United States. So, instead of expounding Americanism as he conceived it, all out of his own head, he made his exposition read as if it were a sermon upon the texts supplied by the "Life of Father Hecker." His paper, entitled "A New Idea in the Life of Father Hecker," is a much more uncompromising exposition of Americanism than anything that is to be found in the "Life of Father Hecker" itself. Monsignor O'Connell declares that in the "Life of Father Hecker" the idea of Americanism shines like golden thread from the beginning to the end of the volume, and gives to the work its character and meaning. But what is Americanism? Americanism has two senses, both political and ecclesiastical. Its political signification is to be found in the Declaration of Independence, which he regards as the final embodiment of the germs of peace which were embedded in the Magna Charta, and thence passed into the Common Law of all English-speaking nations. Contrasted with this Common Law of the English-speaking races, Monsignor O'Connell sets up the political law of the Roman Empire, in which man as man had no rights. The individual was absolutely merged in the State and absorbed into it in such a way that the State had no obligation to consider his individual rights as against itself. By this law of Nero, the dignity of man as created by God was outraged, the sacred rights given by a kind and just Creator violated, and sometimes the whole world was lowered and degraded by the irremediable and humiliating despotism of one frail and irresponsible human creature. Monsignor O'Connell points out that the Church never approved of the body of Roman law, which as a political law was the antithesis of Christianity, and whose relations with the Church were recorded in the history of the persecutions. Nevertheless, although Monsignor O'Connell does not venture to say so in his pamphlet, no one knows better than he the influence which the law of Nero has had in his Church down to the present time; but in his opinion this evil influence is a kind of Pagan obsession from which it would be well to exorcise the Catholic Church in order that she may present eventually a complete code of Christian law bearing throughout and in every part the imprint of the Incarnation. As a means towards this end, he sees in Americanism a hopeful instrument, for the principles of American law are nothing else than the first principles of the law of nature. The Papal delegate in America, Cardinal Satolli, recommended the Gospel and the American Constitution, taken together, as the complete charter of human life, a dictum the far-reaching significance of which will be better appreciated when it is attempted to expound the Gospels in the light of the Declaration of Independence rather than in that laid down by œcumenical councils or by Roman jurists. In the ecclesiastical sphere Monsignor O'Connell points out that Americanism means a Free Church in a Free State. He points out very ingeniously that if the Americans had adopted the Roman doctrine of the need for a legal union between Church and State, they would have established and endowed not the Catholic but the Protestant Church, and further, that the clause in the amendment to the Constitution which declares the incompetency of the State to legislate in matters of religion is equivalent to the abandonment of the whole domain of religion to the

authority of the Church. Therein the exercise of Church authority is absolutely free. This, says Monsignor O'Connell, is the meaning of Americanism in its two aspects, both of which Father Hecker accepted in all the fulness of his heart :

He accepted it in its political aspect, because he knew it recognised as well, if not better than any other prevailing political system, the dominion of God and the natural dignity of man, and at the same time furnished a magnificent foundation for the work of the supernatural. He accepted it because of his great zeal for the conversion of his countrymen. Knowing their profound religious character, he believed their conversion to Catholic truth quite easy, but their conversion to Roman political or public law utterly impossible.

This then is Americanism; and from what has been said in the foregoing it must appear evident to every candid inquirer that it involves no conflict with either Catholic faith or morals, that in spite of repeated statements to the contrary, it is no new form of heresy or liberalism or separatism, and that fairly considered "Americanism" is nothing else than that loyal devotion that Catholics in America bear to the principles on which their government is founded, and their conscientious conviction that these principles afford Catholics favourable opportunities for promoting the glory of God, the growth of the Church, and the salvation of souls in America.

The third source from which I will take extracts for the purpose of illustrating the significance of Father Hecker's Americanism is from the preface which Archbishop Ireland contributed to Father Hecker's Life. Archbishop Ireland is the most Americanist of the Americanists. He is probably the most conspicuous representative of the Christian Church in the United States of America, whether Protestant or Catholic. Since Cardinal Manning died there is no one upon whom his mantle may be said to have fallen so much as upon the Archbishop of Minnesota. As was the case with Cardinal Manning, his chief enemies are among those of his own fold. Outside of the Catholic Church there is no one who does not speak well of Archbishop Ireland, but many of those. who call themselves Catholics complain bitterly of the wide liberality and uncompromising spirit of charity which distinguish the great Western Prelate. The following extracts from the preface which Archbishop Ireland contributed to Mr. Elliott's "Life of Father Hecker" set forth clearly enough the standpoint from which he approaches the subject :—

Father Hecker was the typical American priest; his were the gifts of mind and heart that go to do great work for God and for souls in America at the present time.

It is as clear to me as noonday light that countries and peoples have each their peculiar needs and aspirations as they have their peculiar environments, and that if we would enter into souls and control them, we must deal with them according to their conditions. The ideal line of conduct for the priest in Assyria will be out of all measure in Mexico or Minnesota, and I doubt not that one doing fairly well in Minnesota would by similar methods set things sadly astray in Leinster or Bavaria.

Even priests of American ancestry, ministering to immigrants, not unfrequently fell into the hands of those around them, and did but little to make the Church in America throb with American life. Not so Isaac Thomas Hecker. Whether consciously or unconsciously I do not know, and it matters not, he looked on America as the fairest conquest for divine truth, and he girded himself with arms shaped and tempered to the American pattern. I think that it may be said that the American current, so plain for the last quarter of a century in the flow of Catholic affairs, is, largely at least, to be traced back to Father Hecker and his early co-workers. used to be said of them in reproach that they were the "Yankee" Catholic Church; the reproach was their highest praise.

It