Not only was it given, but we know that it was given. It were useless to have it, if we were not certain that we possessed it. It can serve only those who believe in its existence.

It is a pity that men, through hatred of the pope and jealousy of the Church, should deprive themselves, and those who accept them as teachers, of the blessings which come through this wonderful gift. It is a pity that they cannot yet see, in their endless divisions and empty churches, and in the pagan multitudes who call themselves Christians, the sad consequences of the rejection of infallibility. If men and women would think only for a moment they would realize that even Christianity without infallible teachers must be a frail thing; incapable of resisting any storm, preventing any schism, warding off any heresy. The facts show it. The history of the last four hundred years shows it. The rejection of an infallible teacher has been followed by endless division, uncertainty and doubt; often leading to utter indifference. This has happened to faith. What has occurred in morals is enough to call forth tears.

THE INQUISITION

Let me say first of all that Catholics are not especially bound to defend the inquisition. Indeed, most of them regard it with aversion, and freely condemn, as they abhor, its cruelties. In viewing it, however, we cannot be actuated by the hatred of the Church, which so often drives our enemies into violent and wholly unwarranted attacks. But give us the facts and, if these point to injustice or tyranny, they find no defenders in us.

Further, the present writer believes himself entirely within the law as a Catholic when he declares that all punishment for conscience' sake is a crime. We have no more right to punish a man for his religious beliefs than we have to punish him for any other conviction. He is not only free to believe according to the evidence he has, but to do anything else would be, if it were possible, wicked. But, as a matter of fact, conviction is of the mind and, hence, cannot be interfered with by any power on earth.

Let no one infer from this that a man may

believe as he pleases. Belief is the acceptance of the word of God. Hence, one is in duty bound to ascertain what this word is. If doubt arise he must seek counsel. But when the mind is satisfied with the evidence there is nothing for a man to do but believe; to punish him for so doing is atrocious.

However, to hold a view and to proclaim it are two different things. You may believe in polygamy but you may not teach it. Anarchists are punished not for thinking but for speaking. So in other matters. Heretics are not proceeded against for holding strange views, but for teaching them.

That society has a right to restrain the propagation of opinions which it deems dangerous, no one will deny. Governments have always vindicated to themselves this prerogative. How jealously each nation, including our own, watched the opinions of its citizens during the late war! Was any one allowed to speak as he pleased? Of course one could think, but even in this there was danger.

Even during peace times, no government can tolerate utter freedom of opinion. Would any

one be allowed to publicly advocate the overthrow of the monarchy in England, or of the republic in America? And these are supposed to be the most liberal nations. We censor publications and the theatre, though the book and the play may express the honest convictions of their authors. Governments possess such rights because they possess the right of self preservation-a duty as well as a right. Have religious bodies no such rights?

Whether or not, they have certainly exercised the power whenever they could. The Jews did; so did the pagans. How strenuously both strove against Christianity. Later, the civil power was often asked to intervene in the battles between the Church and its enemies. Protestantism used every effort, not to preserve its own, but to secure what belonged to the old Church. See how the Moslem battled for his faith; how the Turk of recent times shed blood in profusion to maintain or increase his strength. Neither Russia nor Prussia allowed men to depart from the national faith with impunity. If there is a more liberal spirit now in our own land, it must not be forgotten that families and friends often

take vengeance upon the one who forsakes the ancestral belief. And all this happens among organizations and peoples who do not claim to be sole possessors of truth; and who consequently cannot reasonably hold that the convert or pervert-vert for short-is risking his soul's salvation.

The Catholic attitude is different from this. The Church holds that definite doctrines have been revealed; that their interpretation and preservation have been committed to her; that, since Christ has instituted but one Church, she has no legitimate rival. Consequently, she must hold that a man who departs from her is doing himself serious injury; that one who advises others to quit her is trying to involve them in the ruin he has brought on himself. She is therefore consistent in doing everything that she may legitimately do to prevent the spread of the evil. This she does according to principle, and as a matter of duty. Others do the same things in defiance of their professed attitude.

Also, what the Church does is done methodically. Her enemies have had their inquisitions, too. Often have they hurried to the attack with