"The work consists of "Thirteen Systematic Conversations between a Woman and a Priest of Humanity," and the doctrines contained in it are epitomized in the following blasphemous lines:
"_"In a word, Humanity definitely occupies the place of G.o.d, but she does not forget the services which the idea of G.o.d provisionally rendered."_
"TESTIMONY OF REV. PROFESSOR LIDDON.
"Again, during the last two sessions of Parliament, a Select Committee of the House of Lords sat to inquire into the condition of the English Universities. The Marquis of Salisbury was the chairman. The evidence taken before that committee reveals the appalling fact that infidelity, or doubt as to the first principles of the Christian religion, nay, of belief in G.o.d, is wide-spread in the Universities of England, and especially among the most intellectual of the students; and that this sad result is due in a great measure to the teaching and examinations.
In the first report for the session 1871, pp. 67, 69, and 70, in the evidence of the Rev. Professor Liddon, D.D., Canon of St. Paul"s, London, and Professor of Exegesis in the University of Oxford, we find the following pa.s.sages:
_"Quest._ 695. _Chairman._--"Very strong evidence has been given to us upon the influence of the Final School" (the examination for degrees with honors) "upon Oxford thought, as tending to produce at least momentary disbelief."
"_Witness._--"I have no doubt whatever it is one of the main causes of our present embarra.s.sments."
"696.--"That, I suppose, is a comparatively new phenomenon?"
""Yes; it dates from the last great modification in the system pursued in the Honors School of _literae humaniores_. It is mainly the one-sided system, as I should venture to call it, of modern philosophical writers."
"697.--"Is there any special defect in the management which produces this state of things, or is it essential to the nature of the school?"
""I fear it is to a great extent essential to the nature of the school, as its subjects are at present distributed."
"Again, in answer to Question 706, the same witness says:
""I ought to have stated to the n.o.ble Chairman just now that cases have come within my own experience of men who have come up from school as Christians, and have been earnest Christians up to the time of beginning to read philosophy for the Final School, but who, during the year and a half or two years employed in this study, have surrendered first their Christianity, and next their belief in G.o.d, and have left the University not believing in a Supreme Being.""
Now what kind of a being is the infidel, or the man without religion? To have no religion is a crime, and to boast of having none is the height of folly. He that has no religion must necessarily lose the esteem and confidence of his friends. What confidence, I ask, can be placed in a man who has no religion, and, consequently, no knowledge of his duties?
What confidence can you place in a man who never feels himself bound by any obligation of conscience, who has no higher motive to direct him than his self-love, his own interests? The pagan Roman, though enlightened only by reason, had yet virtue enough to say: "I live not for _myself_, but for the Republic"; but the infidel"s motto is: "I live only for myself; I care for no one but myself." Oh, what a monster would such a man be in society were he really to think as he speaks, and to act as he thinks!
A man who has no religion, must first prove that he is honest before we can believe him to be so. It is said of kings and rulers, they must prove that they have a heart, and it may also be said of the man who has no religion, that _he must prove_ that he has a _conscience._ And I fear he would not find it so easy a task.
A man without religion is a man without reason, a man without principle, a man sunk in the grossest ignorance of what religion is. He blasphemes what he does not understand. He rails at the doctrines of Christianity, without really knowing what these doctrines are. He sneers at the doctrines and practices of religion, because he cannot refute them. He speaks with the utmost gravity of the fine arts, the fashions, and even matters the most trivial, and he turns into ridicule the most sacred subjects. In the midst of his own circle of fops and silly women, he utters his shallow conceits with all the pompous a.s.surance of a pedant.
The man without religion is a dishonest plagiarist, who copies from Christian writers all the objections made against the Church by the infidels of former and modern times; but he takes good care to omit all the excellent answers and complete refutations which are contained in these very same writings. His object is not to seek the truth, but to propagate falsehood.
The man without religion is a slave of the most degrading superst.i.tion.
Instead of worshipping the true, free, living G.o.d, who governs all things by His Providence, he bows before the horrid phantom of blind chance or inexorable destiny. He is a man who obstinately refuses to believe the most solidly-established facts in favor of religion, and yet, with blind credulity, greedily swallows the most absurd falsehoods uttered _against religion_. He is a man whose reason has fled, and whose pa.s.sions speak, object and decide in the name of reason.
The man without religion often pretends to be an infidel merely in order to appear fashionable. He is usually conceited, obstinate, puffed up with pride, a great talker, always shallow and fickle, skipping from one subject to another without even thoroughly examining a single one. At one moment he is a Deist, at another a Materialist, then he is a Sceptic, and again an Atheist; always changing his views, but always a slave of his pa.s.sions, always an enemy of Christ.
The man without religion is a slave of the most shameful pa.s.sions. He tries to prove to the world that man is a brute, in order that he might have the gratification of leading the life of a brute. I ask you, what virtue can that man have who believes that whatever he desires is lawful, who designates the most shameful crimes by the refined name of innocent pleasures? What virtue can that man have who knows no other law than his pa.s.sions; who believes that G.o.d regards with equal eye truth and falsehood, vice and virtue? He may indeed practise some natural virtues, but these virtues are in general only _exterior_. They are practised merely out of human respect; they do not come from the heart.
Now the seat of true virtue is in the heart, and not in the exterior. He that acts merely to please man and not to please G.o.d, has no real virtue.
The man without religion often praises all religions; he is a true knave. He says: "If I were to choose my religion, I would become a Catholic, for it is the most reasonable of all religions." But in his heart he despises all religion. He is a man who sc.r.a.pes together all the wicked and absurd calumnies he can find against the Church. He falsely accuses her of teaching monstrous doctrines which she has always abhorred and condemned, and he displays his ingenuity by combating those monstrous doctrines which he himself has invented, or copied from authors as dishonest as himself. The infidel is a monster without faith, without law, without religion, without G.o.d.
There are many who call themselves "free-thinkers," many who reject all revealed religion, merely out of silly puerile vanity. They affect singularity in order to attract notice, in order to make people believe that they are strong-minded, that they are independent. Poor deluded slaves of human respect! They affect singularity in order to attract notice, and they forget that there is another cla.s.s of people in the world also noted for singularity. In fact they are so singular that they have to be shut up for safe keeping in a mad-house.
What is the difference between an infidel and a madman? The only difference is, that the madness of the infidel is wilful, while the madness of the poor lunatic is entirely involuntary. The one arouses our compa.s.sion, while the other excites our contempt and just indignation.
Finally, the man without religion says: "There is no G.o.d." He says so "_in his heart_", says Holy Writ; he says not so in his head, because he knows better. Let him be in imminent danger of death, or of a considerable loss of fortune, and you will see how quick, on such occasions, he lays aside the mask of infidelity; he makes his profession of faith in an Almighty G.o.d; he cries out: "Lord save me, I am perishing! Lord have mercy on me!" and the like.
There is still another proof to show that the infidel does not believe what he says: why is it that he makes his impious doctrines the subject of conversation on every occasion? It is, of course, first to communicate his devilish principles to others, and make them as bad as he himself is; but this is not the only reason. The good Catholic seldom speaks of his religion; he feels a.s.sured, by the grace of G.o.d, that his religion is the only true one, and that he will be saved if he lives up to his religion. This, however, is not the case with the infidel. He is constantly tormented in his soul. "There is no peace, no happiness for the impious," says Holy Scripture.--(Isa. xlviii. 22.) He tries to quiet the fears of his soul, the remorse of his conscience. So he communicates to others, on every occasion, his perverse principles, hoping that he may meet with some of his fellow-men who may approve of his impious views, and that thus he may find some relief for his interior torments.
He resembles a timid night-traveller. A timid man, who is obliged to travel during a dark night, begins to sing and to cry in order to keep away too great fear. The infidel is a sort of night-traveller; he certainly travels in the horrible darkness of his impiety. His interior conviction tells him that there is a G.o.d, who will certainly punish him in the most frightful manner. This fills him with great fear, and makes him extremely unhappy every moment of his life. He cannot bear the sight of a Catholic church, of a Catholic procession, of an image of our Lord, of a picture of a saint, of a prayer-book, of a good Catholic, of a priest; in a word, he cannot bear anything that reminds him of G.o.d, of religion, of his guilt, and of his impiety. So he cries, on every occasion, against faith in G.o.d, in all that G.o.d has revealed and proposes to us for our belief by the Holy Church. What is the object of his impious cries? It is to deafen, to keep down in some measure, the clamors of his bad conscience. Our hand will involuntarily touch that part of the body where we feel pain. So, in like manner, the tongue of the infidel touches, on all occasions, involuntarily as it were, upon all those truths of our holy religion which inspire him with fear of the judgments of Almighty G.o.d. He feels but too keenly that he cannot do away with G.o.d and His sacred religion, by denying His existence.
I have given you the true portrait--the true likeness--of the man without religion. Were you given to see a devil and the soul of an infidel at the same time, you would find the sight of the devil more bearable than that of the infidel. For St. James the Apostle tells us, that "the devil believes and trembles."--(Chap. ii. 19.) Now the Public School system was invented and introduced into this country to turn the rising generations into men of the above description.
_Spread of Infidelity through Bad Education in America; or, The Object of the Public School System._
Mr. O. A. Brownson, in his book "The Convert," Chaps. VII. and VIII., gives us the following information on the origin of the Public Schools in this country:
"Frances Wright was born in Scotland, and inherited a considerable property. She had been highly educated, and was a woman of rare original powers, and extensive and varied information. She was brought up in the utilitarian principles of Jeremy Bentham. She visited this country in 1824. Returning to England in 1825, she wrote a book in a strain of almost unbounded eulogy of the American people and their inst.i.tutions.
She saw only one stain upon the American character, one thing in the condition of the American people to censure or to deplore--that was negro-slavery.
"When, in the next year, Mr. Owen came, with his friends, to commence his experiment of creating a new moral world at New Harmony, Frances Wright came with him, not as a full believer in his crotchets, but to try an experiment, devised with Jefferson, Lafayette, and others, for the emanc.i.p.ation of the negro-slave.
"f.a.n.n.y Wright, however, failed in her negro experiment. She soon discovered that the American people were not, as yet, prepared to engage in earnest for the abolition of slavery. On more mature reflection she came to the conclusion that slavery must be abolished only as the result of a general emanc.i.p.ation, and a radical reform of the American people themselves.
"The first step to be taken for this purpose was to rouse the American mind to a sense of its rights and dignity, to emanc.i.p.ate it from superst.i.tion, from its subjection to the clergy, and its fear of unseen powers, to withdraw it from the contemplation of the stars or an imaginary heaven after death, and fix it on the great and glorious work of promoting _man"s earthly well-being_.
"The second step was, by political action, to get adopted, at the earliest practical moment, a system of State schools, in which all the children from two years old and upward should be fed, clothed, in a word, maintained, instructed, and educated at the public expense.
"In furtherance of the first object, f.a.n.n.y prepared a course of Lectures on _Knowledge_, which she delivered in the princ.i.p.al cities of the Union. She thought that she possessed advantages in the fact that she was a woman; for there would, for that reason, be a greater curiosity to hear her, and she would be permitted to speak with greater boldness and directness against the clergy and superst.i.tion than would be one of the other s.e.x.
"The great measure, however, on which f.a.n.n.y and her friends relied for ultimate success, was the system of public schools.
These schools were intended to deprive, as well as to relieve, parents of all care and responsibility of their children after a year or two years of age. It was a.s.sumed that parents were, in general, incompetent to train up their children, provide proper establishments, teachers and governors for them, till they should reach the age of majority.
"The _aim_ was, on the one hand, to relieve marriage of its burdens, and to remove the princ.i.p.al reasons for making it _indissoluble_; and, on the other hand, to provide for bringing up all children, in a rational manner, to be reasonable men and women, that is, _free from superst.i.tion, free from all belief in G.o.d and immortality_, free from all regard for the invisible, and make them look _upon this life_ as _their only life_, this earth as their only home, and _the promotion of their earthly interests and enjoyments as their only end_. The three great enemies to earthly happiness were held to be religion, marriage, or family and private property. Once get rid of these three inst.i.tutions, and we may hope soon to realize our earthly paradise. For religion is to be subst.i.tuted science, that is, science of the world, of the five senses only; for private property, a community of goods; and for private families, a community of wives.
"f.a.n.n.y Wright and her school saw clearly that their principles could not be carried into practice in the present state of society. So they proposed them to be adopted only by a future generation, trained and prepared in a system of schools founded and sustained by the Public. They placed their dependence on education in a system of _Public Schools_, managed after a plan of William Phiquepal, a Frenchman, and subsequently the husband of f.a.n.n.y Wright.
"In order to get their system of schools adopted, they proposed to organize the whole Union, secretly, very much on the plan of the Carbonari of Europe. The members of this secret society were to avail themselves of all the means in their power, each in his own locality, to form public opinion in favor of education by the State at the public expense, and to get such men elected to the Legislatures as would be likely to favor their purposes. This secret organization commenced in the State of New York, and was to extend over the whole Union. Mr. O. A.
Brownson was one of the agents for organizing the State of New York. He, however, became tired of the work, and abandoned it after a few months."
"The attention of so-called philanthropic men in all parts of the country, was directed to the subject. In 1817, and the following years, commenced what has been improperly termed a revival of education. To form public opinion in favor of Public Schools, the following means were employed: Public School societies and organizations were established in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Portland, Lancaster, Pittsburgh, Worcester, Hartford, Lowell, Providence, Cincinnati, etc.; Thomas H. Gallaudet, James G. Carter, and Walter R. Johnson, made great efforts through the press; there were established the "American Journal of Education," in January, 1826, and the "American Annals of Education." Conventions were held throughout New England from 1826 to 1830, in behalf of Public Schools; lectures were delivered in every precinct in the States, on the subject of education; there were also established local school periodicals, as well as others of a more general character, to contribute towards forming public opinion in favor of Public Schools, in every corner of the country. All these means, and the zealous and unwearied efforts of Horace Mann, Henry Barnard, and others, have contributed towards the success in establishing the Public Schools in our country."--_American Encyclopaedia_.
This is a brief history of the Public Schools. It tells, in clear terms, all that they are, and all that they are to bring about, namely: a generation without belief in G.o.d and immortality, free from all regard for the invisible--a generation that looks upon this life as their only life, this earth as their only home, and the promotion of their earthly interests and enjoyments as their only end--a generation that looks upon religion, marriage, or family and private property as the greatest enemies to worldly happiness--a generation that subst.i.tutes science of this world for religion, a community of goods for private property, a community of wives for private family; in other words, a generation that subst.i.tutes the devil for G.o.d, h.e.l.l for heaven, sin and vice for virtue and holiness of life.
We may, then, confidently a.s.sert that the defenders and upholders of _Public Schools without religion_ seek in America, as well as in Europe, to turn the people into refined Pagans. They recently betrayed themselves. They wish, as Dr. Wehrenphennig and Dr. Wirgow openly said, for an equalization of religious contradictories, a religion and an education which stands above creeds, and knows nothing about dogmas; in other words, they wish for a religion of which a certain poet says: "My religion is to have no religion." The object, then, of these G.o.dless, irreligious _Public Schools_ is to spread among the people the worst of religions, the _no religion_, the religion which pleases most hardened adulterers and criminals--the religion of irrational animals. How far this diabolical scheme has succeeded is well known, for there are at present from twenty to twenty-five millions of people in the United States who profess no distinct religious belief. Everywhere the same effects have been observed. Licentiousness, cruelty, and vice--"Positivism," or the subst.i.tution of the harlotry of the pa.s.sions for the calm and elevating influences of reason and religion. How can it be otherwise?
FOOTNOTES:
[A] Jean Mace.
[B] "_La Solidarite." _(Le Monde Maconnique, October, 5866 [1866], p.
472.)
[C] "_La Solidarite." _(Le Monde Maconnique, February, 5867 [1867].)