BOUGHT WITH THE INCOl 
 FROM THE 
 
 SAGE ENDOWMENT 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 Menrg W. Sage 
 
 xSqx 
 
 ME 
 
 FUND 
 
 ^/z/fA... 
 
 AS.^.^/.^. 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BV777 .F23 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 029 335 522 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029335522 
 
PRESIDENT ELIOT'S TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE. 371 
 
 cliiirch Christianity would do more for tlie University, and, through 
 the University, for humanity, than all else. What Harvard needs 
 is less religious atmosphere, for this the revered Doctor Peabody fur- 
 nished so far as he could ; but it does need more a great wind of vital 
 Christianity, — a great wind of vital Christianity which Phillips 
 Brooks was; one which shall search out all the intellectual, and 
 ethical, and spiritual recesses of each student's being. 
 
 President Eliot is the first example in our time of a new type of 
 university president. It is well that this example should be so mag- 
 nificent. One can hardly help comparing this best representative of 
 the new with the best representative of the old. This representative 
 is President Hopkins. President Hopkins and President Eliot stand 
 alike for virility, mighty personality, wisdom, comprehensiveness of 
 plan, devotion to duty, and greatness of desire to benefit their fellow - 
 men. But President Hopkins touched men as individuals ; President 
 Eliot touches them as a body. President Hopkins was first and last 
 a teacher ; President Eliot is first and last an administrator, a man of 
 afEairs, an executive. President Hopkins was concerned with men : 
 President Eliot is concerned with means, measures, methods. Presi- 
 dent Hopkins avoided opposition by removing its causes, or melted 
 opposition by the warmth of his character ; President Eliot beats into 
 pieces the icy blocks of opposition by the sheer blows of his mighty 
 will. President Hopkins was distinguished for wisdom ; President 
 Eliot is distinguished for strength. The one was the more discreet; 
 the other is the more fearless. President Hopkins elevated the moral 
 and " religious above the intellectual, or rather permeated the intel- 
 lectual with the religious and moral; President Eliot emphasizes 
 more the simple intellectual. President Hopkins began on the moral 
 and religious basis, and so continued ; with President Eliot the moral 
 and religious basis has become more conspicuous with the passing 
 years. President Hopkins's baccalaureate sermons treat of man's 
 duty to God; President Eliot's farewells would relate — were they 
 formally spoken — more to a man's doing his duty in this world. 
 President Hopkins's teachings and counsels were religious; President 
 Eliot's are more ethical. The like of President Hopkins we shall not 
 soon see again : and may the need of trying to see one, who shall be 
 sufiiciently like and sufficiently unlike the present President of Har- 
 vard College to continue his work, be remote. 
 
 Charles F. Thwing. 
 
WHY CHUECH PEOPEETY SHOULD BE TAXED. 
 
 The question of the taxation of church property in the United 
 States is bound soon to become a question of great public concern, 
 because it is already of grave importance. 
 
 The general theory of all just taxation is reciprocal service. 
 Judge Cooley, in his " Law of Taxation," says: 
 
 "The protection of the government being the consideration for which taxes 
 are demanded, all parties who receive or are entitled to that protection may be 
 called upon to render the equivalent. " 
 
 Making the state pay tribute to the church, instead of the church 
 to the state, is a glaring self-contradiction in the United States. It 
 theoretically as well as practically adopts the principle of the union 
 of church and state. The American people would rise up in rebellion 
 against direct taxation for church support ; but what is exemption 
 from taxation but an indirect state support of the church, a virtual 
 subsidy for its support and at the expense of the general public? 
 The state reimburses itself by increasing the tax on the non-exempted 
 property, and exemption is as clearly a gift as would be the amount 
 of taxes the exempted property should pay if it were directly appro- 
 priated from the public treasury. The state avoids a deficiency in its 
 revenues by transferring to other property increased taxation, not by 
 the voluntary action of the taxpayers, but by the compulsion of law, 
 all of which is out of consonance with our republican institutions. 
 
 True, the church yields no private income to the corporators. 
 Neither do many other kinds of property. But the state cannot 
 regulate its action by rule of income. Taxation would no doubt in 
 some instances be a burden. But thousands of property -owners now 
 find it difficult to pay their taxes, and yet the state cannot afford to 
 exempt them. Tax churches, and only those churches that are able 
 to pay taxes would dare to be extravagant. With so much poverty 
 and want in the community, our magnificent church edifices and mas- 
 sive buildings for alleged charitable purposes, on our most valuable 
 sites, are a burlesque on both religion and charity. 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 373 
 
 Benjamin Franklin said: 
 
 " When a religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself ; and when 
 it cannot support itself and God does not take care to support it, so its professors 
 are obliged to call for help from the civil power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its 
 being a bad one. " 
 
 In 1875 President Grant sent a message to Congress on the subject 
 of a total separation of church and state, and the taxation of church 
 property. This message would have been more appropriate for a 
 governor's message addressed to the legislature of a State, for Con- 
 gress has nothing to do with the question in the exercise of its taxing 
 power. The whole spirit of the Constitution leaves this question to 
 be determined by the respective States. But the President's senti- 
 ments were truly American. He said : 
 
 " In 1850, I believe, the church property of the United States which paid no 
 tax, municipal or State, amounted to $87,000,000. In 1860 the amount had 
 doubled. In 1870 it was $354,483,587. In 1900, without a check, it is safe to 
 say, this property will reach a sum exceeding $3, 000, 000, 000. So vast a sum, 
 receiving all the protection and benefits of government, without bearing its pro- 
 portion of the burdens and expenses of the same, will not be looked upon acqui- 
 escently by those who have to pay the taxes. In a growing country, where real 
 estate enhances so rapidly with time as in the United States, there is scarcely a 
 limit to the wealth that may be acquired by corporations, religious or otherwise, 
 if allowed to retain real estate without taxation. The contemplation of so vast 
 a property as here alluded to, without taxation, may lead to sequestration without 
 constitutional authority, and through bloodshed. I would suggest the taxation 
 of all property equally. " 
 
 President Garfield said : 
 
 " The divorce between church and state ought to be absolute. It ought to 
 be so absolute that no church property anywhere, in any State, or in the nation, ' 
 should be exempt from equal taxation ; for if you exempt the property of any 
 church organization, to that extent you impose a tax upon the whole oommun ity . " 
 
 The census of 1890 has reported the alleged value of church edifices, 
 the lots on which they stand, and their furnishings, as $680,687,106. 
 The following table shows in detail these values where the aggregate 
 exceeds $4,000,000: 
 
 All Methodists $133, 133, 304 
 
 All Roman Catholics 118, 343, 366 
 
 All Presbyterians 94, 869, 097 
 
 All Baptists 83, 834, 373 
 
 All Episcopalians 83, 774, 018 
 
 Congregationalists 43, 335, 437 
 
 All Lutherans 35, 060, 354 
 
 AllReformed 18,744,343 
 
 Disciples of Christ $13, 306, 088 
 
 Unitarians 10,335,100 
 
 All Jewish congregations . 9, 754, 375 
 
 Universalists 8,060,333 
 
 All United Brethren 4, 937, 983 
 
 Evangelical Association. . . 4, 785, 680 
 
 German Evangelical Synod 4, 614, 490 
 
 All Friends 4, 541, 334 
 
 This table does not include the value of parsonages, lots, monasteries, 
 convents, schools, colleges, and the like; nor are these figures accu- 
 
374 WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 
 
 rate, for a conservative estimate of the Eoman Catholic " church prop- 
 erty" alone is $250,000,000, and of the property of all sects, in this 
 country, |2, 000, 000, 000. Under the head of " church property" mil- 
 lions of dollars' worth of revenue-producing property evades taxation, 
 such as large lots of valuable land upon which there are no buildings, 
 and which are held for revenue, and thousands of mercantile build- 
 ings, schools, and even factories. Practically the effect of exemption 
 has been to encourage the church in buying vast tracts of land, which 
 are daily growing in value. Dr. H. L. Wayland cites this instance: 
 
 " I am credibly told that on a recent occasion a bishop went to the owner of 
 a valuable tract in a neighboring county, and said, 'What is the price of such 
 and such a piece of land?' 'Sixty thousand dollars.' 'You have raised the 
 price fifteen thousand dollars?' 'Yes. ' 'Very good ; here is a check. '" 
 
 It was bought for the church simply as an investment. 
 
 The Protestant opposition to the taxation of church property 
 comes almost wholly from the Episcopalian and Lutheran churches, 
 which are more or less related to state-supported churches in Europe. 
 Yet there are many advocates of this taxation even among the Lu- 
 therans and Episcopalians. But the Eoman Catholic church is unani- 
 mously opposed to any taxation of its churches, schools, or other 
 property. There are many reasons why its property should especially 
 be taxed. 
 
 The property of the Eoman Catholic church should be taxed 
 because it is held, not by the people, but by the individual ecclesias- 
 tics, and is therefore personal property exclusively under personal 
 control. The anathemas of the Council of Trent are pronounced 
 against all, even the clergy, who will not resist even the state itself, 
 should the state attempt to give laymen, or anybody but priests and 
 bishops, the control of church property. The sixteenth canon of the 
 Council of Baltimore, held in 1852, shows how far a power emanat- 
 ing from Eome exercises influence over church property in this land. 
 Instances could be cited where the curse of excommunication was pro- 
 nounced against all Eoman Catholics who would not give the bishop 
 control of certain property, and the persons resisting the clerical usur- 
 pation were assaulted and driven by force upon. the Sabbath from the 
 very threshold of the church which they helped to build as a house 
 for their own worship. The churches are held in the name of the 
 bishops, and not in the name of the trustees. It is said that Arch- 
 bishop Corrigan of New York holds more than $50,000,000 worth of 
 real estate in his own name. There have been numerous transfers 
 
"WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 375 
 
 of property from trustees to M. A. Oorrigan: not to M. A. Corrigan, 
 Arcibishop, nor to M. A. Corrigan as trustee for the Eoman Catholic 
 cTiurch, but simply to M. A. Corrigan. Many of these parcels 
 cover whole squares of land, and nearly all of them are of great 
 value. The Pope's nuncio, Bedini, came to America in 1856 to 
 wrest the church property of Eoman Catholics from the hands of 
 the trustees and to place it in the hands of the bishops. It was 
 because the title was vested in the bishop that the trustees of Eoman 
 Catholic churches in 1855 prayed the New York State legislature for 
 redress, and the State answered that those who build the churches 
 with their own money can govern the church temporalities as they 
 please, and to-day the one-man power of the Archbishop prevails over 
 the sovereign law of the State of New York. Because the Eoman 
 Catholic bishops are the owners in fee simple of nearly all the church 
 property within their respective ecclesiastical jurisdictions, and have 
 the legal right to control, possess, and use it by assignment, by will, 
 or otherwise, therefore their property should be taxed as personal 
 property, or at least be deeded back to the worshippers. 
 
 Calvary Cemetery, though nominally under the name or title of 
 the Trustees of St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York city, is in 
 reality Archbishop Corrigan 's own property. It is unlawful and 
 against the discipline of the Archbishop to bury anywhere but in 
 the Archbishop's cemetery. Like a true monopolist he commands 
 his own price and terms for lots, graves, tombstone fees, etc. , for his 
 own benefit ; and I have been told by those who ought to know 
 that the sums received have been at times as much as $2,000 a day. 
 It seems to me that the Archbishop ought to pay a tax on the 
 receipts. 
 
 The legitimate result of exemption has been the bestowment of 
 public money upon the Eoman Catholic church and its institutions. 
 The money donated by the city of New York to the Eoman Catholic 
 church (to say nothing of the five and a half blocks of land in the 
 best parts of the city, now worth $5,000,000), from 1869 to 1883 
 inclusive, was $8,555,250.39; from 1884 to 1893 inclusive, $5,526,- 
 733.34. Protestant denominations received during the ten years 
 1884 to 1893 inclusive, $365,467.34. The New York State legisla- 
 ture for the year 1890 appropriated to sixteen institutions under 
 Eoman Catholic control $1,079,986.07; to all other denominational 
 institutions, numbering twenty-eight, $946,649.67. The amount 
 of public money granted from the United States Treasury for the 
 
376 
 
 WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 
 
 Eoman Catholic Indian Missions, compared with the niggardly 
 amounts given to other denominations, deserves notice : 
 
 Total 
 in 9 years 
 
 Roman Catholic $2, 738, 571 
 
 Presbyterian . 
 
 Congregational 
 
 Martinsburg, Pa 
 
 Alaska Training School. 
 
 Episcopal 
 
 Friends 
 
 Mennonite 
 
 Middletown, Cal 
 
 346, 130 
 
 217,369 
 
 33,310 
 
 8,350 
 
 110,166 
 
 160,557 
 
 39,590 
 
 1,523 
 
 Carried forward $3,685,456 
 
 Total 
 in 9 years 
 
 Brought forward $3,635,456 
 
 Lutheran, Wittenberg, Wis. 68,580 
 
 Unitarian 39, 150 
 
 Methodist 33,345 
 
 Mrs. L. H. Daggett 6,480 
 
 Miss Howard 9,375 
 
 Lincoln Institution 300, 600 
 
 Hampton Institute 180,360 
 
 Total 14,373,346 
 
 These appropriations are in violation of both the letter and the 
 spirit of the first Amendment to the Constitution. It is earnestly 
 hoped that all Protestant denominations will decline .to receive 
 further appropriations from the United States, so that they can con- 
 sistently protest against the excessive grants to Roman Catholic 
 schools. As an American I am opposed to this whole business, as 
 recognizing the principle of a union of church and state. Let each 
 church support its own schools and charities, with its own money and 
 not the money of others. The principle is wrong, for Protestant and 
 Romanist alike, the latter sinning only more shamelessly than the 
 former. 
 
 Wherever you look, Roman Catholic church property is rapidly 
 multiplying ; and where the Protestant churches get lots, the Roman 
 Catholics get blocks, — entire squares, — and hold them against all 
 comers. Taxation or confiscation is inevitable. 
 
 Indeed, from the earliest days of the church, every chapter in its 
 history teaches the lesson of the danger of its policy as a great 
 property-holder with special privileges. 
 
 The church derived her right to hold property from the civil 
 power. Constantine the Great, great only in his sins, received his 
 title of Great because he provided by a civil law, still held sacred, 
 that temporal power of the See of Rome, which made Dante sing : " 
 Constantine, how much evil originated, not from thy conversion, but 
 from that grant from thee to the first Pope whom thou madest rich. " 
 And in less than fifty years from that time the priests of Italy had 
 gained one-third of the soil of that country. In 1857 one-third of 
 the real estate in Mexico belonged to the church, besides more than 
 $300,000,000 of other property in that poor country, and its revenues 
 were greater than those of the Mexican government. "When the 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 377 
 
 property of the churcli was placed upon the market, its actual value 
 was sufBcient to pay the national debt several times. In Chili the 
 saints nominally hold property. St. Dominick has an income of more 
 than a million dollars a year, for which he is not taxed one cent. In 
 Catholic Guatemala the property of the church was confiscated in 
 1843 ; then there was a reaction led by the priests, but in 1873 all 
 the church property of Guatemala passed into the hands of the gov- 
 ernment. In Catholic Costa Eica, Venezuela, and Uruguay, the 
 governments took the property away from the church, applied it 
 to governmental purposes, and in some cases gave it to the people 
 from whom the priests had stolen it. 
 
 In Canada, during the short time between the settlement by the 
 French and the conquest by the English, the priests had gotten in 
 their hands more than eight million acres of land. In the Province 
 of Quebec, the exemption of church property from taxation has 
 become a serious question. A careful writer, in speaking recently of 
 the excommunication of certain outspoken French papers in Montreal, 
 said: 
 
 " One of the great crimes committed by the excommunicated papers was that 
 they spoke against the provision which exempts religious corporations from 
 taxes. The city of Montreal is invaded by religious orders of every description, 
 possessing immense properties. These orders buy up the most eligible sites and 
 erect costly edifices for the propagation of their views. Often the property they 
 buy brings a handsome revenue to the city in the shape of taxes. But as soon 
 as this property is handed over to the Romish church, it becomes untaxable. 
 The richer the church becomes, the poorer the city grows." 
 
 The great quantity of untaxed church property in Montreal is 
 driving out the Protestant minority who pay three-fourths of the 
 taxes. The English in that city own the enterprises without which 
 the Province of Quebec, left to the absolute domination of ecclesias- 
 ticism, would be as backward as Ecuador. These English enterprises 
 are taxed remorselessly. There is over $100,000,000 worth of ex- 
 empted ecclesiastical property in the Province. The English have 
 to pay for these exemptions by increased taxation. When the treas- 
 ury is empty, the cry is, " Tax the English corporations. " It is a 
 hopeful sign that there is a growing and strong feeling among the 
 liberal Catholics that all these rich religious corporations should pay 
 taxes. Another writer, referring to the same Province, says: 
 
 " There are municipalities where 50 per cent of the whole assessed value is ex- 
 empt, and others where the value of the property exempted actually exceeds that 
 of the property taxed. Besides, we have to contribute to support religious 
 
B78 WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 
 
 orders, or see our stores and shops boycotted. The Provincial treasurer is drawn 
 on to provide for a great many of them. I might say that the Church spends or 
 oversees the spending of one-third of the vrhole Provincial revenues, less the 
 subsidies from Ottawa. " 
 
 I have quoted thus at length from the Province of Quebec, because 
 the principle there is the same as here, the Eoman Catholic church 
 simply lacking the power to enforce its demands in the United States 
 as it does in Quebec. Had church property been taxed, Quebec 
 would not now be bankrupt, nor would the church have sunk that 
 Province into its present deplorable state. 
 
 Other denominations also are in danger of amassing wealth. Why 
 should not the great estates of Trinity and the Collegiate churches of 
 New York city, or Old South Church in Boston, held as investments 
 for income instead of direct church uses, be taxed? The spirit of 
 our laws is opposed to exemptions, and there needs to be made out a 
 very strong case to justify an exemption from taxation of property 
 owned by corporations like these. Common honesty should lead 
 them to bear their share of that taxation which provides a constant 
 increase of value. All buildings rented for income, even though that 
 income be devoted to religion and charity, should be taxed. R. J. 
 Long, Esq., of Boston, says that in that city the churches hold 
 $40,000,000 of exempted property. The assessed value of New York 
 city church property, exclusive of parsonages, parsons, and priests, is 
 $51,217,525. Walk up Broadway from Rector Street and up Fifth 
 Avenue, and from these streets alone you can see to what extent the 
 church property in New York is underestimated. $200,000,000 is 
 less than the actual value of the church property of the metropolis, 
 and when we remember that the assessed value of the real estate of 
 New York city for 1894 is but $1,618,853,135, it can easily be 
 figured out how highly oppressive exemption becomes to the other 
 taxpayers. 
 
 It is claimed that churches should be exempted because they 
 improve the morals of the community, and raise the taxable value of 
 the other property. That depends altogether on the church. But 
 admit the fact that churches, as a rule, are a public benefit ; so are 
 private schools, picture-galleries, and factories, yet such property can- 
 not be exempted without starving the state. Why, then, should 
 churches enjoy this favor on the ground of benefits rendered; and 
 other property, that can assign the same reason for the favor, be 
 excluded therefrom? If the doctrine of benefits be given as a reason 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD BE TAXED. 379 
 
 for exemption in behalf of religious corporations, it refutes itself by 
 proving more tban the state can admit. The New York City Com- 
 missioners of Taxes and Assessments, in their annual report for 1893, 
 speaking of the injustice of this species of legislation, say: 
 
 " Corporations and associations avail themselves of these laws and decisions 
 of the courts to escape taxation to such an extent that the public authorities 
 must soon demand relief from the legislature. " 
 
 Tax churches, and modest buildings will be erected where they 
 are most needed, instead of building one great structure in a fashion- 
 able quarter. Churches are said to be public property. But the 
 Eoman Catholic churches charge an admission fee to the ordinary 
 service. High money, high mass; low money, low mass; no 
 money, no mass. In many Protestant churches the pew-rents are so 
 high and the people so exclusive that the public feel that they are 
 not wanted. I would tax all charitable institutions, hospitals, and 
 orphanages. Their work is not wholly philanthropic. They receive 
 revenue. In New York city, orphanages are maintained at public 
 expense. " The Foundling Asylum," under the charge of the Sisters 
 of Charity, received during the years 1884 to 1893, inclusive, from 
 the "Taxation and General Fund," $2,641,998.02. During the 
 same period and from the same fund the " New York Catholic Pro- 
 tectory" received $2,462,500. Many of these so-called orphans have 
 both parents living, and the Church is maintaining them at the expense 
 of the taxpayers, and making an enormous profit, the appropriations 
 being five times in excess of the expense of providing for such 
 " orphans." It is a sad sight to see a congregation, whose combined 
 wealth is millions, pleading exemption for their orphanage. My 
 mother was left a widow with three little orphans to care for. Her 
 little country home was taxed. If any orphanage should be exempt 
 from taxation, such a one as that ought to be. 
 
 The taxation of church property is in the interest of American 
 
 principles, and in harmony with the experience of nations. Taxing 
 
 one man for the propagation of another man's religion is glaringly 
 
 unjust. Moreover it is a relic of the principle of the union of church 
 
 /and state inherited from the Old World, and not yet eliminated from 
 
 ' our political system. 
 
 Madison C. Peters. 
 
IS FAITH IN A FUTUEB LIFE DECLINING? 
 
 Are faith and interest in the future life, and in those spiritual 
 facts which a belief in it involves, growing forces among our people? 
 
 I have been asked to throw a side-light on this question from the 
 point of view of a special experience. Since to certain minds illus- 
 tration is better than argument, while to many they are identical, 
 I must regret that I have so little material to present of the kind 
 particularly requested, and that I must substitute for it chiefly a 
 simple expression of the belief which the possession of such material 
 has helped to form. 
 
 It befell me, about a year ago, to make an allusion to the letters 
 from unknown readers called forth more than twenty-five years ago 
 by the publication of " The Gates Ajar " ; and I am asked what reply 
 these may have helped to give to the question heading this brief paper. 
 
 It should be said at once that these letters — thousands in number 
 and coming from all quarters of the globe, from almost every nation- 
 ality, all stations in life, all degrees of intelligence, all phases of 
 culture, all ages and stages of human experience — have been des- 
 troyed. Had this not been the case their publication would have 
 been a doubtful and delicate question; since one may fail to see the 
 reason why the confidences of a stranger are not to be respected as 
 well as those of a friend. These letters, it should be understood, 
 were and are chiefly from two kinds of writers : the bereaved and 
 the perplexed. When one reflects how large a variety of human 
 beings these types compass, one perceives that the recipient would be 
 more than dull or wilful to whom such a correspondence had not been 
 educational. It is the result of this bit of special training which is 
 given in these few pages. 
 
 It can be said, in a word, that this experience, so far as it goes, 
 has not offered evidence of a general decline in that impulse of mind 
 which we may venture to call spiritual attentiveness. Of course, the 
 present movement of a book already a generation in circulation does 
 not produce the same amount of response, but continues to produce 
 the same proportion of response to the truths with which it dealt. 
 This response has undergone certain modifications, and has become 
 
IS FAITH IN A FUTURE LIFE DECLINING? 381 
 
 more significant of deep, underlying currents working tlieir way from 
 dark mines of faith to the unseen, upper air. 
 
 Twenty years ago the author of a popular work upon a subject as 
 engrossing as the future life, would have been more likely to be over- 
 whelmed with the appeal of simple, personal bereavement, or with 
 merely natural curiosity about the hereafter. His recognition would 
 have been chiefly divided between the cries of despair and the smiles 
 of hope and gratitude. Such letters covered every phase of religious 
 development, as well as every type of humanity. I remember the 
 colored girl in the reformatory, literally the one black sheep in the 
 institution, the rebel whom nobody could manage, till, on a chance 
 reading of the book that better girls have cast aside with no appreci- 
 able interest, she deliberately announced: " If Heaven is a place like 
 that, I want to go, — and I mean to"; and who on the testimony 
 of her teacher became from that hour docile, studious, pure, and 
 gentle, with an intelligence which shames her mental and moral 
 superiors, setting forth for the Celestial City and singing by the way. 
 
 I recall receiving, in the same mail, the few memorable words of 
 some man of affairs or of public influence. It is a mistake often made 
 to suppose that books of the sort referred to depend chiefly on 
 women or on feminine sensibility for their recognition. I doubt if 
 it is generally known or believed how often men of the world are 
 touched by sincere, religious work, and how willing they are to say 
 so. I think I can speak with some authority on this point, and I 
 am glad to add my testimony, for whatever it may be worth, to the 
 spiritual candor of the less religious sex. 
 
 Piled above such letters from such extremes of life as these, lay 
 the appeals of the mourning, black of edge, and blurred with tears, 
 a mass high beneath the hand and heavy to the heart. It was the 
 cry of the king in the chamber over the gate. It was the moan in 
 the darkness for the slain first-born. It was the outcry of desolated 
 husband and of heart-broken wife. It was the anguish of widowed 
 maid, of orphaned youth, of friend bereft. These letters had the 
 terrible and unanswerable power of all great, natural voices; and 
 " the chiefest of these are " love and grief. Year upon year the 
 recipient has sat dumb before these signs of human misery and hope. 
 They have rolled upon the shore of life, a billow of solemn inspira- 
 tion. I have elsewhere called them the human argument for faith 
 in the future life ; ^ and see no reason for amending the term. 
 
 If asked more closely to define whatever change may be said to 
 
383 IS FAITH IN A FUTURE LIFE DECLINING? 
 
 have passed upon the general nature of these indices of popular 
 thought and feeling, as occupied with the unseen life, I should say 
 that there has been a slow but perceptible movement in the direction 
 of the intellectual, and somewhat away from the more emotional 
 aspects of the subject. It would be safe to observe that a less pro- 
 portion of such recognition from unknown readers now expends itself 
 in the simple outcry of grief; a larger proportion extends itself into 
 religious speculation. 
 
 The piteous appeal does not so often stop at : " Give me comfort, 
 or I perish!" but moves on to: " Give me faith, and the reasons for 
 it, for I would live!" There is perhaps less demand for sympathy, 
 more for belief; less dependence, more investigation; less blind 
 handling of the merely personal problem of bereavement, more reach- 
 ing after the larger life of a faith too strong to be shattered by 
 individual pain. It is difiScult to generalize accurately from such 
 floating data, but such are my impressions, and I can but give them 
 as they stand. An interesting instance of the facts that have formed 
 them occurred so recently as to have some special illustrative value. 
 A stranger, a man, apparently an educated one, writes to this effect 
 (his letter, like the rest, is destroyed, and its tenor can be only given 
 from memory) : 
 
 I am an old man. I have lived almost my limit of threescore and ten, and 
 I have come to this age without belief in immortality and without faith in the 
 Christian religion. I now begin to see the end of life approaching, and it makes 
 me uncomfortable. I am not afraid of death, but I should be a happier man if 
 I could see any reason to think that I knew something of what lies beyond it. 
 I have studied this subject for years as honestly as I know how. I have never 
 received any light upon it. Dissatisfied with my own efforts, I have appealed 
 by letter to certain prominent clergymen — men whose business it is to enlighten 
 those who have not the happiness to share their faith and their hope. In no 
 case have I received any satisfactory reply. In most I have received none at 
 all. I now appeal to a woman who seems to be sincere, and, as a religious 
 teachei', I ask you : Can you answer me these questions? 
 
 Then follow the usual problems of the confirmed doubter : neither 
 more nor less difficult to answer. The letter closes with this extraor- 
 dinary proposition: 
 
 If you can and will reply to my difficulties so as to give me any real light 
 upon them, I shall be ready to go in peace, a happy man ; and to prove that I 
 am in earnest in what I say, I should be glad in such case to provide an educa- 
 tion for any ten young people whom you should select and name to me for that 
 purpose. 
 
 It may not be out of place to pause for the natural inquiry : 
 Was this letter answered? Assuredly it was; but, unfortunately. 
 
IS FAITH IN A FUTURE LIFE DECLINING? 383 
 
 after an enforced delay of such time, that what appeared to be a 
 traveller's address may not have been overtaken; and if I may be 
 allowed to take this, the only way open to me now, of reaching the 
 unknown correspondent, I should like — if this page ever meets his 
 eye — to acquaint him with the fact that his challenge was accepted, 
 and his questions answered " to the best of my knowledge and belief. " 
 If his appeal was genuine, it would be worth while for him to know 
 that it was not discarded. If otherwise, it is quite unimportant 
 whether he knows it or not. But, how often in a lifetime do we 
 regret assuming that a man means to be honest when he seeks the 
 guidance of his better nature? 
 
 This brings us to another point which weighs strongly upon the 
 mind of one whom any special experience or training has led into the 
 study of modern doubt and faith. I refer to the greatly-increasing 
 demand for simple and absolute sincerity in the souls of those who 
 ■undertake to be, in any interpretation of the term, religious teachers. 
 
 The time has gone by when mere theology can blindfold common 
 sense, or when cold ecclesiasticism can mislead earnest struggle. It 
 is just as true that mere mysticism, or vague emotionalism, or self- 
 deception, or spiritual laziness have no part or lot in the great process 
 of spiritual illumination now silently broadening throughout the world. 
 
 Nothing in the whole course of the special experience referred to 
 has so vividly impressed me 'as the imperious insistence of the people 
 upon clear-cut, positive, honest faith in the hearts of their spiritual 
 guides. Hundreds of unknown friends and jurors have spoken only 
 to say this : " Do you believe what you have written ? Are you speak- 
 ing God's truth, or playing with a delusion? Do you teach us your 
 own creed? From your soul, is this your soul's faith?" Then comes 
 the startling and solemn challenge : " If you believe — we believe. " 
 All religious teachers — nay, all believing souls — know the grave force 
 of challenges like these. Trust is the final argument for deserving 
 trust. Sincerity is, I sometimes think, the one only absolute essential 
 to spiritual power. To express belief in the simple terms of convic- 
 tion ; never to advance by a shade or an accent beyond ; never to be 
 lured into affirming what is expected because it is expected, or into 
 conforming to precedent because it is the religious fashion ; to say 
 what one is sure of, and no more; to handle the sacred fire for one's 
 neighbor as for one's own soul, — this is spiritual honor; and by it he 
 who bears the name of Christ must expect and deserves to be judged. 
 " He who honors his word as if it were his God's," is a great Chris- 
 
384 IS FAITH IN A FUTUEE LIFE DECLINING? 
 
 tian poet's definition of a true man. As long as the world spins 
 through the dark, human hearts will honor honor and have faith in 
 faith ; and human belief will follow the believers who know what 
 they think, and are not afraid to say so, and are afraid to say any- 
 thing else. 
 
 Is faith in the unseen life increasing ? The personal lesson learned 
 in this direction is soon recited. The larger answers to the question 
 all lie beyond the personal range, and some of them weigh upon the 
 pausing pen. 
 
 It is only possible, however, now and here to suggest that a careful 
 study of the present conditions of the higher life of our people will 
 reveal significant signs, intelligible to the eye that is educated to read 
 them and wishes to do so. Our popular literature presents some 
 striking features of the subject. Our present phases of benevolence 
 tell their own strong story. The growth of interest in psychical 
 research means much. Theosophy and fashionable forma of mysti- 
 cism signify something. The enormous advance of organized religious 
 associations, the present tolerance of intelligence and culture for popu- 
 lar forms of Christian usefulness hitherto ignored or scorned, mean more. 
 
 After all, the kingdom of God is within us. No argument, no 
 illustration, no conclusion can convince the worldly, the paltry, or 
 the spiritually vulgar of the reality, the power, and the silent advance 
 of the spiritual life. And he who lives that life needs none of " all 
 these things" to confirm his faith in it. He knows his descent, and 
 recognizes his kin. It was a true philosopher, a great genius, and a 
 woman of the world who said : " A soiil without faith is like an open 
 bottle of which the precious essence escapes or is deteriorated. " The 
 distance between the soul and truth is always shorter than it seems ; 
 and the Hand that leads across the dark spaces in which faith goes wan- 
 dering and belief gets lost, is strong. We do not, because we cannot 
 see him, refuse to follow the guide who comes to our rescue in the dark. 
 
 The mightiest powers of the world are invisible ones. Faith in 
 the unseen is faith in force. Its growth proceeds as other growth 
 does, by nutrition. It calls for at least as much respect, opportunity, 
 and nurture, as the growth of hothouse fruit or a blooded horse. 
 He who gives it less attention than he gives the instructions of his 
 fencing-master or the politics of his party, will not find himself a 
 qualified juror in any trial of the great and noble claims of the 
 inner life upon the allegiance, the intelligence, or the trust of the 
 world, Elizabeth Stuart Phelps. 
 
THE THEBATBNING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 
 
 An open letter published in a recent number of " The Catholic 
 Citizen" appealed to the clergymen of Protestant churches to discour- 
 age The American Protective Association and similar secret so- 
 cieties organized more or less directly to oppose by agitation and 
 by ballot Catholicism and Catholics. The writer of the letter re- 
 minded his readers that it is the purpose of the Christian ministry to 
 promote peace rather than distrust among fellow-citizens and neigh- 
 bors. This appeal met with much sympathy from lovers of fair play, 
 to whom a warfare in the dark is repulsive ; and a war of church 
 against church is of all things most demoralizing. 
 
 The present situation, however, deserves more than cursory atten- 
 tion. There have been for some years organizations, especially active 
 in the Western States, which are professedly anti-Catholic. All are , 
 strenuously secret even as to their membership, and their exceeding 
 reticence makefe it difficult to discover their relation to each other or 
 to form any accurate idea of their strength. Such a society, the 
 American Protective Association, has during the last year been ex- 
 ceedingly active in the West ; and a similar one, the Canadian Pro- 
 tective Association, has developed considerable strength in Canada. 
 
 Founded at Clinton, Iowa, in 1887, the American Protective 
 Association now claims to control 2,000,000 votes, and certainly has 
 a considerable following; its lecturers are numerous; a number of 
 newspapers are published in its interest; and, in a very large pro- 
 portion of the cities and towns of the West, the Association has been 
 a conspicuous and frequently a triumphant factor in the elections. 
 Each of these instrumentalities — platform, press, and polling-place — 
 has afforded its own opportunity for hostile collision, and serious 
 personal injuries have been a not uncommon result. In many places 
 its lecturers have been mobbed. In Chicago, newsboys on the streets 
 have for some months found sale for an organ of the Association, 
 and have sometimes been attacked and beaten by thugs from the 
 nearest saloons, — strange champions of religion. Frequently the 
 police assisted in or ignored these attacks, but public indignation in 
 
436 THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 
 
 all cases was so furious that they seem of late to have protected the 
 newsboys. Surprising strength has also been shown at the polls. 
 At Peoria, for instance, to quote from the Chicago " Herald, " a 
 Democratic newspaper, " every candidate suspected of uncertainty on 
 the anti-Catholic question was strongly opposed, and the entire Board 
 has A. P. A. tendencies. " And from Milwaukee and other towns, 
 equally unlikely, in all reasonable expectation, to furnish fertile soil 
 for such a movement, a similar story comes, and even in State con- 
 ventions the hand of the organization is apparent. Finally, I assert, 
 with certainty of prompt contradiction, but with equal certainty that 
 I am right, that an overwhelming majority of the non-Catholic popu- 
 lation in some measure sympathizes with this organization. Those 
 who have unqualifiedly attacked them are men more distinguished 
 for their upright lives than for knowledge of the " ways that are 
 dark" of the ward politician. Some acquaintance with such matters 
 might perhaps modify their views. From no standpoint can the 
 matter be regarded as trivial. 
 
 It must first t)f all be understood that I am not a member of the 
 American Protective Association, or of any other organization having 
 a like object, nor am I in communication with any agitators to that 
 end. On the contrary, I specifically refused an invitation to join 
 such a society, although it might in indirect ways have been much to 
 my advantage. Such organizations are objectionable for three rea- 
 sons : (1) in the promise said to be exacted from each member — 
 though this, for aught I know, may be an absolute falsehood as to 
 each and all of these societies — to cast the ballot in accordance with in- 
 structions from headquarters ; (2) because a secret political society is 
 peculiarly liable to misuse and corrupt misdirection ; and (3) because 
 a religious society of the sort is apt to fall into the hands of extre- 
 mists and bigots. But these are general assertions ; and whether they 
 are applicable to the societies mentioned, I do not know. Finally, 
 I have no quarrel with the Catholic church in its religious work. I 
 recognize that it has, like other churches, a constituency which no 
 other could reach or control ; I would not destroy it if I could ; alnd 
 I would instantly resent any attempt to curtail the religious freedom 
 of Catholics as I would my own religious freedom. This personal 
 information is given merely to show the standpoint from which this 
 article is written. 
 
 But with this conviction of the Catholics' right to absolute free- 
 dom of religious belief ; with no desire to distinguish socially be- 
 
THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 427 
 
 tween Protestants and Catholics ; without holding the Church respon- 
 sible for the faults and follies of a single dissolute priest or nun, — I 
 confess to a growing feeling that a religious war is impending in 
 American politics, in which the Catholics will be opposed by men of 
 all other sects and by men of no religion at all, and, will be so 
 overwhelmingly defeated that the ward politician will shun their 
 friendship as he would shun disease or pestilence. Such a consum- 
 mation is most devoutly to be avoided. No man ought to be kept 
 out of ofSce or put into it because of his religious beliefs. Moreover, 
 while we are thus wasting time on a question not legitimate for polit- 
 ical discussion, a thousand questions which are legitimate, and which 
 need discussion, are pressed to one side. 
 
 Yet while this struggle is, as I believe, steadily coming nearer, 
 I hope that it is not inevitable, and that it may be averted. The 
 Catholic Church is a great organization, guided by men of ability 
 who are devoted to its success. If they can be persuaded of the 
 mistakes of the past, and earnestly seek to avoid them, this conflict 
 may be averted, and the days and years to come shall not be — as 
 otherwise I am forced to believe they must be — full of bitter conflict, 
 damaging both to American civilization and to Catholicism. 
 
 For the habit slowly settling on many American voters, of treat- 
 ing the Catholicism of a candidate as a strong reason for voting 
 against him, many and varied reasons are given. Some of these I 
 propose to state, with such comments as may show upon what founda- 
 tion they rest. Nor is it pertinent to my present purpose whether 
 these be good or bad reasons ; whether they rest on fact or idle rumor ; 
 whether the fact — if it be present — is sufficient to support the conclu- 
 sion: I point out only that certain allegations are made, that they are 
 by many people believed, and that from this belief arises prejudice 
 and hostility. 
 
 First, it is said that the Catholic Church is un-American, not in 
 sympathy with our institutions, and in fact struggling constantly to 
 weaken them,. 
 
 The Church of Eome goes back to a time when many a thing was 
 approved which would not now be tolerated. Much of its ceremo- 
 nial, of its ritual, its text-books, and its music dates from barbaric 
 times. Its head once claimed paramount authority over all temporal 
 rulers, and has never since abjured that claim, which, however benef- 
 icent in previous times, as undoubtedly it often was when the 
 Church alone dared protect the weak against the strong, cannot now 
 
428 THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 
 
 be allowed. It is perhaps natural, whether it be just or not, that 
 men should confound this doctrine with old enormities not now per- 
 petrated or approved. Again, its leaders, being unmarried men, un- 
 der the orders of a foreign superior, are less bound by natural ties — 
 of relationship, of training, of early association — than other men are. 
 That circumstances such as these do tend to weaken the hold of the 
 national spirit seems beyond question. But it may be hoped that the 
 Church may be content with what the people of this country by their 
 constitutions, the struggles of the past, and the determination of the 
 present, have allotted as the fit province of religious bodies, — a prov- 
 ince absolutely distinct and apart from politics. If she does, she 
 will be protected in absolute freedom. But some priests deserve the 
 rebuke recently administered by a Catholic correspondent, who in- 
 dignantly attacks " this foreign spirit which in former years existed 
 in a marked degree among the clergy" ; and further says: " It is nec- 
 essary, in America, that the church should be American, otherwise 
 our countrymen could not find peace in her fold. " Nor must it 
 be forgotten that certain priests have within a few years been repri- 
 manded by their superiors for no offence that an outsider can per- 
 ceive, save a determination to use their own judgment on social and 
 political questions not in any way connected with religion. 
 
 Second, it is declared thai the Catholic Church is the persistent enemy 
 of the American public-school system. 
 
 Certain things, I take it, are held by the vast majority of Ameri- 
 cans to be so settled by our hundred years of history that they are 
 now beyond argument or protest. Thus, " The state must in no 
 manner recognize or assist any church, and on the other hand it must 
 not in any degree put forth its power to harm or discourage any. 
 Not one penny of state moneys shall, by any means, directly or indi- 
 rectly, find its way into church coffers." The Catholic Church ought 
 in sheer self-defence to recognize the hostility with which a vast ma- 
 jority of American citizens regard any violation of this law, written 
 and unwritten, — a hostility so determined and bitter that it will 
 override all other considerations. But many things have shown the 
 restless determination of the Catholic Church to supplant public and 
 absolutely non-sectarian schools by parochial schools controlled by 
 church authority, yet supported by state money. 
 
 Now as to those facts which have made the American people 
 strongly suspect that the Catholic Church aims by fair means or foul 
 to destroy the public-school system. 1. It should be remembered 
 
THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 439 
 
 that prelates of this churcli have frequently declared their opinion 
 publicly, and have denounced the public schools as "godless." 2. 
 Public schools are not found in those countries generally controlled 
 by Catholics. 3. The history of the past few years has clearly in- 
 dicated what the church desires. The attack upon the compulsory 
 education law of Illinois and Wisconsin some years since was pro- 
 fessedly aimed against certain features of the law capable of abuse 
 and easily amended, yet the demand made was for complete destruc- 
 tion of the law. Nor will the friends of education soon forget that 
 in the States of Illinois and Wisconsin there is no legal way by which 
 children can be prevented from neglecting their only means of educa- 
 tion, the only means of avoiding that ignorance and those vicious 
 habits which threaten civic prosperity ; and that this unfortunate state 
 of things is due to a combination of two religious organizations with 
 cowardly and dishonest politicians. The so-called Faribault experi- 
 ment comes to mind, though as yet its results and animus are not so 
 clear. Yet it is -a disappointment to those who have hoped much 
 from the intellectual breadth of Archbishop Ireland, that he did not 
 see the impropriety of the appointment of the members of any relig- 
 ious order, wearing its garb, bound to it by a life-long vow, and still 
 subject to the orders of its officers, to any institution controlled by 
 the state. For if these women were true to their ordination vows, — 
 and I do not imagine that any one doubts it, — -their best efforts were 
 due to their church ; and they were in effect not teachers, but propa- 
 gandists of the Catholic faith, and the state must in all these matters 
 be utterly impartial. The recent attempts to secure state aid for 
 parochial schools — in Maryland by circulars sent to members of the 
 Baltimore City Council and to the members of the State legislature, 
 and in New York by the so-called Spelissy Bill — are less equivocal. 
 True, they have been promptly disclaimed by church dignitaries, and 
 there seems no reason for fearing any serious movement in this direc- 
 tion at present. But, while the situation is on the whole reassuring, 
 there are some features which are not so pleasing. Many Catholic 
 papers have asserted the essential justice of the plan, and the " Free- 
 man's Journal," of New York, not approving of the present move- 
 ment, advocates another plan, essentially the same in results. Nor 
 do those church dignitaries who have ruined this movement by their 
 lack of support give much encouragement upon the general question, 
 for, disowning any active support, they are careful not to say any- 
 thing in condemnation of the principle. Mgr. Farley, for instance, 
 
430 THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 
 
 contents himself witli saying that the officers of the diocese have not 
 approved the bill, and that it is therefore irregular. The exceeding 
 care with which Mgr. SatoUi just at this time reiterates his belief in 
 parochial schools has been much quoted, and is perhaps not wholly 
 without significance. It is encouraging, indeed, to note the attitude 
 of prominent Catholic laymen on this subject, but it is impossible to 
 forget a recent statement in the Philadelphia " Catholic Standard" : 
 
 " No one has any right to outline a course of policy for the church in this 
 country except the hierarchy, our divinely appointed rulers. Theirs is the pre- 
 rogative of determining as well the nature of the Catholic claims, as the oppor- 
 tune time for pursuing them." 
 
 Third, it is said that in political matters the Catholic Church is an 
 organized machine, determined hy fair means or foul to secure offices for 
 its own men against all others. 
 
 That, as to individuals, there is much truth in this, I fear no 
 candid man having any information can doubt. How far the gen- 
 eral organization is fairly responsible, and how far reform is possible, 
 are quite different questions. The evidence of the fact falls into 
 various classes. As to results, it is a matter of common knowledge 
 that in the cities where the Catholics have any considerable strength 
 their percentage of office-holding is enormous. 
 
 A striking illustration of this fact has recently been presented in 
 the protest, alleged to have been made to President Cleveland, against 
 the appointment of Mr. Eussell as collector of the port of Chicago, 
 and of Mr. Lawler as United States marshal, a protest thus voiced 
 by one of those who made it : 
 
 " It is not to be understood that any objection is being made by Democrats 
 in Chicago to the appointment of any man solely because he is a Catholic. But 
 there is very strong objection, and it is groviring among Democrats, to the 
 appointment of only Catholics to the Federal offices in Chicago. The same 
 objection would be made if the President should select all Baptists, or Presby- 
 terians, or Methodists." 
 
 The same protest further explained that the Catholics of Chicago al- 
 ready have the mayor, the chief of police, the chief of the fire de- 
 partment, the postmaster, the State's attorney, the clerks of the cir- 
 cuit, superior, and probate courts (and the clerk of the criminal court 
 might have been added, leaving but one State court of record, not 
 appellate, whose clerk is not a Catholic), a number of the judges, 45 
 of the 68 aldermen, 90 per cent of the police force, 80 per cent of 
 the members of the fire department, and 67 per cent of the school- 
 
THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 431 
 
 teachers. When it is recalled that Catholics are very far from a ma- 
 jority of the voting population, it can hardly be doubted that their 
 votes are cast largely as a unit, and that they have already made the 
 religious question a controlling one in their voting. I might speak 
 of methods and of the dark history of municipal misgovernment 
 wherein Catholics have taken too prominent a part. But meaning, 
 as I do, to point out the necessity and the means of avoiding trou- 
 ble, — not to raise it, — I gladly pass such topics. 
 
 Fourth, it must be confessed that the preceding arguments are 
 largely supported hy a widely diffused prejudice against Catholics in gen- 
 eral among many who are habitually indifferent to all religious mat- 
 ters. Very frequently it is based on no better reason than a personal 
 acquaintance with one or two Catholics whose lives are not a credit 
 to their church ; but this is not all. Some facts may be cited as 
 lending strength to this feeling. The Catholic Church has been 
 too lenient with rascality and with powerful rascals. True, it has 
 much company from Protestant denominations ; and the readiness to 
 accept help from a rascal, though you must wink at his knavery, has 
 tempted many : yet this church has sinned above all others in this 
 respect. That man who has for many years been the chief of gamblers 
 of Chicago, and perfectly well known to be a " fence" for thieves, 
 has during all that time been a Catholic, and an enormous propor- 
 tion of his ill-gotten gains has flowed into the coffers of the church. 
 
 Among those occupations which public opinion holds in disfavor, 
 the proportion of Catholics is frightfully large; a fact partly ac- 
 counted for and made inevitable by the next fact, that the work of 
 the church lies largely among a poor, illiterate, and morally degraded 
 class, and therefore that church naturally shares in the odium of their 
 faults, — a most natural result, if not a just one. 
 
 Fifth, the persistent appeals of Catholics for the giving of money to 
 aid in their church worh, addressed to people outside their communion 
 as well as to those within, are a fruitful source of irritation. The 
 office buildings of cities are constantly visited by Sisters of various 
 Orders, who turn over the results of their solicitations to their supe- 
 riors. I have the highest respect for the courage and self-sacrifice with 
 which these ladies face what must be an unwelcome task, since they 
 must often be met with discourtesy ; yet it is difficult to regard as fair 
 the dilemma in which a man, willing to regard a religious system 
 with all toleration, yet sincerely differing from it, must choose 
 between meeting with a disconcerting rebuff a woman who is un- 
 
432 THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 
 
 doubtedly doing a self-sacrificing and in some respects useful work, and 
 of giving his money to the support of an institution of which he cannot 
 approve. This may seem trivial, but I believe that in effect it is not so. 
 
 Nor are these moneys applied only to temporary purposes. On 
 the contrary, the Catholic church is vastly increasing its wealth by 
 means of the contributions of Protestants, sometimes unwilling, some- 
 times practically extorted by threats of business boycotts. Be it re- 
 membered that wealth is power, — and every dollar given to the Cath- 
 olic church helps in its intrenchment. It is significant that by the 
 census of 1870 — no later figures are at this writing available — the 
 Catholic church, having 5.68 per cent of all religious organizations, 
 6.33 per cent of all edifices, and 9.18 per cent of all sittings, had 
 17.2 per cent of all church property. The census of 1890 on this 
 subject is not yet complete, but fragmentary and less reliable figures 
 indicate a still larger percentage of property in the hands of Catholi- 
 cism. I grant that certain other denominations also show a high per- 
 centage of wealth. But if Catholics give more assiduously than those 
 of other denominations, they on the other hand have a much larger 
 representation of the poorer classes. For this disproportionate wealth 
 the gifts of Protestants are largely responsible. In a small inland 
 city, some years ago, a sum of several thousand dollars was left, by 
 a Protestant, to found a hospital. As it was alone too small for the 
 purpose, the sum was handed over to a Catholic Sisterhood, who 
 raised the necessary additional amount. One of the largest hospitals 
 of Chicago, founded and sustained by citizens of all creeds for charity 's 
 sake, in like manner fell into the hands of Catholicism. That these 
 funds are rightfully applied may be conceded: that they assist in 
 strengthening the one denomination is likewise true. 
 
 In this connection it is worth while to notice that we are rapidly 
 drifting toward that condition of ecclesiastical monopoly of financial 
 resources which forced in England the famous statutes of mortmain 
 — forbidding the gathering of property in the " mort main" — the 
 " dead hand" — of the church, which in many Catholic countries has 
 compelled the confiscation of church property. We may ere long be 
 forced to consider whether one of these means of relief and defence 
 shall be adopted, or whether, on the other hand, safety is to be found 
 in taxation of church property, applicable to all denominations, but 
 peculiarly effective against this, the wealthiest of them all. 
 
 Sixth, the operations of the Land League are a constant source of dis- 
 trust and of suspicion. 
 
THE THREATENING CONFLICT WITH ROMANISM. 433 
 
 Irisliinen constitute tlie most conspicuous section of the Catholic 
 Church in this country. They have left their own land and accepted 
 the protection of this country, yet use it as a vantage-ground from 
 which to attack Great Britain, a country with which we are at peace. 
 Thus have our institutions been brought under reproach and miscon- 
 struction abroad. The methods of the Land League, with accusation 
 and counter-accusation so frightful that murder is but a peccadillo 
 beside them, have co-operated to throw into bad odor the society and 
 all connected with it ; for he who betrays his associate in an enter- 
 prise into a life-long imprisonment, that the traitor may appropriate 
 the money intended for the victim's maintenance, is infinitely worse 
 than a murderer, — and these charges, though not proven, have been 
 often made. 
 
 The Catholic Church in America is to-day under suspicion, 
 aroused by its history. If it continues to attack the public schools, 
 men will universally conclude, as some have frankly declared, that 
 the Catholic Church is afraid of general intelligence, and therefore 
 fears common schools. If it continues to provoke hostility by any 
 of those means which have been suggested, then is the controversy 
 inevitable, which in the words of " The Churchman" (a Protestant 
 Episcopal organ) " would be a great public misfortune, for it is cer- 
 tain that it would revive those old hatreds which are far more at 
 variance with Christ's religion than are errors of intellect." And 
 sad will be the day for civilization, for religion, for the Catholic 
 Church, when this thing comes to pass. No doubt there is fault on 
 the side of the opposition, — which I do not call Protestant, because 
 those classes of the community which cannot be classed as Protestant 
 are as much interested as are the Protestants of the least tolerant type. 
 
 The gentlemen who put forth the letter in " The Catholic Citizen, " 
 to which I have above referred, are no doubt sincerely grieved at the 
 attack made upon their beloved church. I now appeal to them to be 
 as open-minded as they ask others to be. Consider whether in truth 
 there be not something of fault on the Catholic side of this contro- 
 versy, as they ask others to recognize that their prejudices against 
 Catholicism have tinged their conclusions, as it may be with the 
 writer. If they can control the intolerant within their own com- 
 munion, they can reckon on support from many without it who on 
 points of doctrine have little in common with them. And in joint 
 action against extremists lies the only possibility of peace. 
 
 E. M. Winston. 
 38 
 
WHY CHUECH PEOPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 
 
 The question of taxing church property has never been a question 
 of any public concern, except when an appreciative and generous 
 people rebuff the few agitators in favor of church taxation, by giv- 
 ing them no encouragement, no attention, and sincere condemnation. 
 It will never become a question of any importance until the majority 
 of citizens have deserted religion utterly, and have substituted educa- 
 tion and culture for churches and prayers. 
 
 The attempts which General Grant and General Garfield made to 
 interest the public in the taxation of church property fell so fiat that 
 no other statesman or politician has mentioned the subject since, and 
 the cranks of politics and religion now have it solely to themselves. 
 Notoriety may be gained by discussing its possibilities and its figures : 
 nothing more. Christians of all varieties feel that exemption of 
 church property from taxation is the most natural tribute which the 
 state can pay to the church for the good work done by churchmen in 
 the direct interest of good, clean, stable government. If opposition 
 is to arise, then it can come with good grace only from atheists and 
 materialists, who deny the usefulness of all religion. Strangely 
 enough these people rarely object to the exemption of church prop- 
 erty, although their principles would justify their opposition. It is 
 only the notoriety-hunter, as a rule, the supposed Christian who is 
 willing to have his own faith belittled, if the faith of his enemy can 
 be subjected to the same humiliation, that regularly raises the ques- 
 tion of taxing church property. And, as a rule also, it will be found 
 that his object is less the equalizing of taxation, less the desire for 
 justice, than a vicious eagerness to subject the Roman Catholic 
 Church to annoyance and injury. 
 
 Church property in this country is untaxed because an overwhelm- 
 ing and most creditable popular sentiment insists upon the exemption. 
 There is hardly a sound Christian in the land that would not vote 
 against any proposition to impose taxes, for any reason, on church 
 properties. The people see and feel, even when they cannot state 
 the arguments in its favor or answer the sophisms of opponents, the 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 435 
 
 soundness of the position taken by legislators in this matter. This 
 strong public sentiment has its basis in reasons as profound and proper 
 as the arguments of reverend promoters of church taxation are im- 
 proper, shallow, and unsound. Unless the taxation of church prop- 
 erty were made a condition of legislative war between the Catholics 
 and the non-Catholics of this country, no agitator could get a Coxey 
 guard in numbers and respectability to follow him in a crusade for 
 taxation. 
 
 The people see that exemptions from taxation are not only numer- 
 ous, but also fit and reasonable in many cases. The laws of New 
 york State exempt the property of schools, academies, colleges, 
 and the furniture of the same, poor-houses, reformatories, homes of 
 industry, and the personal property of clergymen to a certain amount. 
 In New York city the exemptions from taxation include St. Luke's 
 Hospital, the Eoosevelt and Presbyterian Hospitals, the Consumptive 
 Home, Home for Incurables, all libraries, all colleges, the National 
 Academy of Design, Cooper Institute, the Children's Aid Society, 
 and scores of other charities. 
 
 Every citizen recognizes the decency of exempting these properties 
 from taxation; for a greater reason the property of the churches 
 should enjoy the same privilege. 
 
 The people see the truth of Judge Cooley's statement that, " the 
 protection of the government being the consideration for which taxes 
 are demanded, all parties who receive or are entitled to that protec- 
 tion may be called upon to render the equivalent. " They accept that 
 statement. The citizen and resident, in return for protection, give 
 their proper tax to the government, and sometimes render it personal 
 service. They have been personally benefited in a hundred ways by 
 the orderly civil society which a good government has secured for 
 them : they have made money, enjoyed all the relations of social life 
 in perfect liberty, and are in debt to the government even when they 
 have paid their taxes. But the churches also have made their return 
 for the protection accorded them. They have paid no taxes, but they 
 have labored night and day to secure to the state the best sort of 
 citizens. They have preached at all hours and seasons the duty of 
 loyalty to the state, and have spent more hours than the state could 
 pay for in looking after the poor and helpless, in preventing sin and 
 disorder, in keeping pure and wholesome the very elements which go 
 to make a decent state. If the ordinary citizen is still in debt to his 
 government when he has paid his taxes, the state is still in debt to 
 
436 WHY CHTJRCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 
 
 the churches when the tax on church property has been remitted. 
 The people feel that, even when certain clergymen deny it. 
 
 The people see that church property is really, in the point of use, 
 their property, and that it would be as sensible to tax the New York 
 City Hall and Central Park as to tax the churches, the schools, and 
 the asylums. The churches are as free to the public as the city 
 buildings ; they have been built for the use of the people, with the 
 people's money; and they are still supported by voluntary oilerings. 
 They are kept open to suit the necessity and convenience of the pub- 
 lic, and all their services are for the multitude. It may be said in 
 fact that the churches are more truly the property of the people in 
 point of use than even the city offices, for in the churches they are 
 always welcome, and it is not for the comfort and happiness of the 
 clergy that these buildings are erected, but solely for the people, after 
 the first in,tention of honoring God. History shows that the church 
 property for eighteen hundred years has always remained the people's 
 property, whether it remained in the hands of the church corporation, 
 as in Austria, or was confiscated by the state to fill its coffers, as in 
 England, France, Italy, Mexico, and other countries. To tax prop- 
 erty so truly the property of the people is simply an absurdity of the 
 same nature as taxing the public schools because they enjoy the 
 protection of the Federal government. 
 
 The people see, even where some clerical leaders cannot, that the 
 work of the churches is more truly beneficial to the state, more 
 directly so, than the work of the state-supported public schools : for 
 these teach only material knowledge, and develop only the intellectual 
 side of a man, whereas the churches concern themselves with his 
 moral and spiritual nature, and try to make him and keep him, not 
 merely an intelligent citizen, but clean, dutiful, obedient, law-abid- 
 ing, and spiritual. And whereas the work of the schools is an 
 influence that directly affects only five or ten years of a citizen's life, 
 the work of the churches begins with birth and ends only with death, 
 pursuing the man through every phase of his earthly career, encourag- 
 ing him in virtue, strengthening him in temptation, aiding him in 
 danger, supporting him in trouble, teaching and advising him in 
 doubt, pointing out his responsibilities, reproaching him — even 
 punishing him — for sin and dereliction. The Eoman Catholic Church 
 is doing this work for 12,000,000 Americans, as more than one friendly 
 Balaam has loudly testified. Not a Protestant sect of importance but 
 will claim as much for its own fold, and will be believed by the peo- 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 437 
 
 pie of tlie fold. This work directly benefits the state, and the state 
 has never been asked to pay one cent for a moiety of the work by 
 which it has been directly benefited. When, therefore, at the wish 
 of the people, it remits a certain portion of the taxes on church prop- 
 erty,^ — for it does not remit all, — the sensible people of the land are 
 satisfied that some proper acknowledgment has been made for in- 
 estimable service ; they approve of it, and they recognize the fact 
 that the state is still in debt, and must always be in debt, to the 
 church for such service. 
 
 Apart from this view of the matter, which may be called econom- 
 ical and is concerned with the mere money and moral value of the 
 church societies to the state, the people have another reason — a very 
 just and very beautiful one — for remitting taxes on church property, 
 even though some of their clerical leaders have overlooked it. The 
 people acknowledge the existence, the providence, the goodness of 
 God. In a spirit of reverence they decline to settle taxation, light 
 or heavy, on the temples raised in His honor, from Whom they have 
 received all good things, and in Whose loving and merciful hands lie 
 all their destinies. Not only do the professed and practising Chris- 
 tians entertain this feeling, but that ever-increasing multitude in this 
 country, the indifferents in religious matters, sprung from Christian 
 parents, bound by family ties to Christians,- — even these decline to be 
 coaxed or worried into any plot for the taxation of property which is 
 held for the honor of God and the good of the people and their gov- 
 ernment. The sentiment of reverence is to their credit, and it con- 
 trasts very strangely with the contrary sentiment held by clergymen 
 supposedly Christian and intelligent, who rank the churches, in point 
 of influence, power, dignity, and usefulness, with grammar-schools, 
 art-museums, and factories. 
 
 When the advocate of taxing church property is pushed to the 
 last extremity, as he invariably is if a Christian, he justifies himself 
 with the everlasting argument of the union of church and state. An 
 article in the May number of The Forum quotes President Garfield 
 as follows : 
 
 ' ' The divorce between church and state ought to be absolute. It ought to be 
 so absolute that no church property anywhere, in any state, or in the nation, 
 should be exempt from equal taxation : for if you exempt the property of any 
 church organization, to that extent you impose a tax upon the whole com- 
 munity. " 
 
 The last statement is true of every exemption, and applies with full 
 
438 WHY CHUECH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 
 
 force to the individuals freed from taxation for public services, as 
 well as to the churches : but it does not prove that there ought not to 
 be any exemptions, or that exemptions are an injustice to the com- 
 munity, or that any union of church and state exists because of 
 exemptions. The state has a right to exempt ; and in the case of the 
 churches the remission of taxes is no injustice to the citizen, since 
 the state, from a money point of view, is still the church's debtor. 
 
 The union of church and state is a bugbear in America, for the 
 simple reason that not one in a thousand knows its meaning. When 
 the state formally names a church the church of the community 
 ruled by the state, builds and supports its churches, schools, and 
 charities, pays salaries to the clergy, treats with the church authorities 
 as to duties and privileges, and has a voice in the appointment of 
 church officials, then you have a union of church and state. Such a 
 union exists under very few governments to-day, and where it does, 
 as a rule, the results are often unsatisfactory to the churches. To 
 say that the remission of taxation to the churches is encouraging a 
 future union of church and state in this country is more than extrava- 
 gant. Not even the payment of sums of money to charities which are 
 doing the work which would otherwise be neglected or would fall 
 into the hands of government officials, can be called a tendency to 
 the unification of church and state in the European sense. The state 
 has a right to recognize the work of private individuals in behalf of 
 its citizens, and it can reward the workers as it pleases by exemption 
 from taxation, by money gifts, by direct support, or by the confer- 
 ring of honors. No one denies it this right in the support and 
 encouragement of science: why, then, should the right be denied in 
 the case of charitable work in behalf of citizens? The moment 
 any real union of church and state is attempted in this country, the 
 people will be able to recognize it. Federal compact with church 
 authorities, salaries to the clergy, complete support of churches and 
 charities, and all the other features of such a union, cannot be done 
 in the dark or be accomplished piecemeal. In the mean time there 
 must be always in existence at the very least such a union of action 
 between church and state as exists in this country. Both church and 
 state are concerned with the one individual, the citizen. They can- 
 not be separate if they would. It is unavoidable that the church, if 
 it be of any use whatever, shall help the state : is there any solid 
 reason why the state should not help the church, at least in the minor 
 matter of making and keeping the citizen a moral and loyal creature? 
 
WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 439 
 
 A union of activities in behalf of the man must exist between the 
 church and the state, whether they will or not : the European union 
 is another affair, and against it the American Constitution has pro- 
 vided in the First Amendment. 
 
 Eeally the question of the taxation of church property has no 
 point, no interest, unless its discussion be aimed at the Eoman 
 Catholic Church in this country. The unvarying method of all 
 clerical advocates of taxation is to close with a special plea for the 
 immediate and heavy taxation of the church property of the Catholic 
 body. This circumstance raises a suspicion of the sincerity of these 
 advocates. The article in the May Fokum already cited is from the 
 pen of one of these gentlemen, the Eev. Madison C. Peters, the most 
 distinguished baiter of Catholics since the days of the Eev. Justin 
 Fulton. His arguments in general have been answered in the first 
 part of this essay : his particular plea for the taxation of Catholic 
 church property remains to be examined. He is in favor of the tax- 
 ation of all church property, but he finds that " there are many 
 reasons why Eoman Catholic church property should especially be 
 taxed. " 
 
 A litany of grosser errors than the " many reasons" it would be 
 hard to find, and the task of following him through the labyrinth 
 which he has built up is most unpleasant. His reasons for the 
 special taxing of Catholic church property are : 
 
 1. The church property is held, not by the people, but by individual eccle- 
 siastics. 
 
 3. It is the personal property of churchmen, under personal control. 
 
 3. Only priests and bishops can hold church property. 
 
 4. In this respect one-man power prevails over the law of the state. 
 
 5. The bishops are the owners in fee simple of nearly all church property. 
 
 6. They can do with it as with private property, leave it to relatives, etc. 
 
 As illustrations of these assertions he gives the following : 
 
 1. Archbishop Corrigan owns Calvary cemetery. 
 
 3. He never permits Catholics to bury elsewhere, and all the receipts are his. 
 
 3. It is said that he owns $50,000,000 of church property. 
 
 4. Many transfers of church property have been made from the trustees to 
 M. A. Corrigan : not to the Archbishop, but to the citizen, Corrigan. 
 
 4. The Pope's Nuncio, Archbishop Bedini, came to America in 1855 to wrest 
 the church property from the trustees and place it in the hands of the bishops. 
 
 It is unfortunate for the Eev. Mr. Peters's reputation as a careful 
 writer, a conscientious Christian with a regard for the good name of 
 every man, and a clergyman eager to preach the truth though the 
 
440 WHY CHURCS PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 
 
 heavens should fall, that each statement and each illustration num- 
 bered above is erroneous. The facts in the case are these: 
 
 1. The churches of New York State, and all the property belong- 
 ing to each church or parish, are owned by corporations formed 
 according to the special law of the State : said corporations always 
 consisting each of five trustees, viz. , the bishop of the diocese, the 
 vicar-general, the parish priest, and two laymen of the particular 
 parish. No others hold parish property. The religious orders, both 
 men and women, hold their property in the same fashion, except 
 that the trustees are taken solely from their own members. 
 
 2. There is no church property held by the bishops or priests as 
 personal property in this or any other State. The Third Plenary 
 Council of Baltimore, in its decrees on the subject of church property, 
 urges the bishops to place all church property under the protection of 
 legal incorporation where it can be done safely, as in the State of New 
 York : where such incorporation cannot be made, it requests the bishop 
 to have himself made a corporation sole, and thus to hold the church 
 property as any other corporation would ; and where this cannot be 
 done it permits him to hold the property in fee simple. There are 
 few States, if any, where the laws are so adverse that church prop- 
 erty has to be held by the bishop in fee simple; but when the 
 instances happen, the Council provides against trouble by ordering 
 the bishop to make a will within three months after his consecration, 
 by which all church property is left to his successor ; and he is also 
 compelled to keep a list of church properties and a list of his personal 
 properties, copies of which are placed with his metropolitan, in order 
 that no confusion may follow his death. 
 
 3. That bishops and priests alone can hold church property is 
 evidently untrue from the laws of this State, which provide for lay 
 trustees, from the fact that the lay religious orders hold their own 
 property, and from the special instances — two out of a thotisand- — of 
 the New York Cathedral and Calvary Cemetery, which are owned by 
 ten trustees, among whom Archbishop Corrigan is the only church- 
 man. The deeds of ownership are on record. 
 
 4. There is no evidence that the power of the Archbishop, or of any 
 bishop, prevails over the law of the State in this or any other instance. 
 
 6. There is no evidence that all the bishops are owners in fee 
 simple of the church property. The majority are simply members of 
 the church corporation, as in this State, or corporations sole, as in 
 Maryland : and where they are forced to hold it in fee simple, they 
 
way CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 441 
 
 and their brother bishops would much prefer to hold it under such 
 laws as prevail in this State. In this diocese I know of only two 
 instances where a bishop holds church property in his own name — a 
 strip of disused cemetery in Melrose, held temporarily by Archbishop 
 Corrigan on account of legal difficulties in the way of transfer, and a 
 piece of land in the Bahamas, held by the same prelate because 
 British law requires it. 
 
 6. Neither by the law of the State nor by the law of the Balti- 
 more Council can a bishop dispose of church property at his pleasure. 
 As a trustee or a corporation sole he is bound by the usual restrictions. 
 Where permitted to hold church property in his own name, the statutes 
 of the Council, the laws of his own province, not to mention his 
 feelings of honor, duty, and religion, and the facts in each case, are 
 the safeguard. 
 
 With regard to the particular instances so felicitously provided 
 by Mr. Peters: 
 
 1. Archbishop Corrigan does not own Calvary Cemetery: he is 
 one among ten trustees. 
 
 2. Catholics can bury where they please within the restrictions 
 laid down by the Church. As a matter of fact Catholics bury in 
 all the Catholic cemeteries of the neighborhood, and not a few are 
 taken to the cemeteries attached to the churches where they wor- 
 shipped before coming to the city to live. The Archbishop has 
 nothing to do with the revenue from tombstones, or from any other 
 source. It is received by the proper officers of the corporation. 
 
 3. The Archbishop of New York owns no church property, with 
 the exceptions named above. He is not the holder of $50,000,000 
 of real estate, which might have been guessed from a casual examina- 
 tion of Mr. Peters's own figures. On page 373 he states that the total 
 value of our church property in the United States is $118,342,366. 
 It is hardly possible that the Archbishop should own almost one-half 
 of it. The total value of church property in this diocese of New 
 York, excluding the property of the religious orders, is estimated at 
 $17,676,000, and it is heavily in debt. 
 
 4. There is not a single piece of church property in the diocese 
 deeded from its trustees to M. A. Corrigan; nor to M. A. Corrigan, 
 Archbishop ; nor to M. A. Corrigan, Trustee ; nor is there any piece 
 of real estate in the name of M. A. Corrigan. Therefore there are 
 no parcels of church property covering whole squares of land, in 
 Archbishop Corrigan 's name. 
 
442 WHY CHURCH PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. 
 
 5. The Pope's nuncio, Archbishop Bedini, did not come to 
 America in 1855, and he did not come to wrest church property from 
 the trustees. He came in 1853, and did very little while here except, 
 figuratively, dodge the bullets of Mr. Peters's clerical ancestors. He 
 left hastily the next year, astonished at the murders and burnings 
 done in the name of religion. 
 
 Thus the argument in favor of specially taxing the church prop- 
 erty of Catholics comes to an inglorious end. The reasons produced 
 by Mr. Peters are not true, and the thesis depending upon them is 
 much worse off than the house built upon the sand, after the wind 
 and the rain got through with it. He was not content with reasons 
 for the general taxation of all church property ; he had to find rea- 
 sons for loading Catholic churches with taxation though all others 
 escaped. Surely, if exceptions were to prevail in this matter, few 
 could oflier stronger reasons than the churches, schools, and chari- 
 ties of the Catholic church. They are unquestionably the property 
 of the people, the common people, who built them and now support 
 them: they are open to all, for worship, aid, recreation, and train- 
 ing. The churches belong as truly to the people, in the point of 
 use, as does the public park : the Catholic schools in New York, 
 for instance, educate 30,000 children at a cost of $250,000, saving 
 the city $750,000, besides giving the city Christian citizens; the care 
 of the sick, the orphan, the aged, provided by the Sisterhoods, is the 
 best and kindest in the world. 
 
 If taxation of church property ever becomes a fact in this country, 
 it will be for reasons very different from those offered by clergymen 
 of Mr. Peters's character. Such a taxation is utterly opposed to 
 American principles, contrary to the custom of nations, very distaste- 
 ful to people that believe in God and in Christ. It can be estab- 
 lished in this country only when religion has lost its truth and charm 
 for the vast majority of the people. Even then the privilege of 
 exemption will be simply transferred from the churches to the art- 
 museums, the ethical -culture temples, and perhaps the gymnasiums 
 and dancing-academies. The State will always have the right of 
 exemption, and will ever take delight in its exercise. 
 
 John M. Farley. 
 

 '^**/J 
 
 ■^/^m^ 
 
 tspT'jK^ar^!*,^