by the cry about education. Give us the right sort of education, and the more of it the better; give us the wrong sort, and the less of it the better. Our people are a reading people; better that they could not read than that they should read the miserable trash the press is now sending forth. We have lived long enough to learn that not every "whitened heap yonder" is to be taken as so much flour. Immense danger may lurk under specious names. We are, as we have always been, the friends of education, but not of bad education, or of an education which educates for earth instead of heaven, for the devil instead of God.

The author of the sermon thinks the aim of the Jesuits in this country is, by the education of youth, to counterwork Protestantism (p. 17). What! is the Doctor afraid of education? Is Protestantism not proof against light? We thought it was the boast of its friends that it was born of the advanced intelligence of the human race, and had the capacity to expand and adapt itself to every change of the human intellect. A moment ago, the Doctor upbraided us with our love of ignorance, accused us of not educating our children; and now he is afraid, if we educate, it will be all up with Protestantism. Really, it is a hard thing to please a Presbyterian Doctor of Divinity.

"They [the Jesuits] will involve this land in troubles and conflicts."ib. The truth never yet was preached, but it produced troubles and conflicts. Our blessed Lord himself said, "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth.” No doubt, if the Gospel is preached here truly, faithfully, boldly, by its earnest and devoted missionaries, the wicked will be offended, and the devil will do his best to stir up troubles and conflicts. But we would rather have war than peace with error, with sin, with the world, with the flesh, with the devil. If Dr. Potts would not, then all we have to say is, that he does not appear to agree with our Lord and his Apostles.

But they will gain an influence which they will turn to the ruin of liberty (ib.). But we thought one of the principal charges against the Jesuits was, that they were the enemies of crowned heads, and king-killers. If so, they must be ultrarepublicans. In monarchical governments they are dreaded as enemies of the monarchy, in republics as the enemies of popular liberty! This is singular. We have before us the Remonstrance for the Divine Right of Kings, written by the English Solomon, the learned King Jamie, in which he labors

to prove that the Catholic Church is at war with kingly government, and for that reason ought not to be tolerated. Our American Calvinists, men who began here by founding a theocracy, or rather a minister-ocracy, and made church-membership the condition of citizenship, are now terribly alarmed lest the Jesuits shall overthrow democracy and set up a king. When our Calvinistic brethren shall show that they have some regard for any other liberty than the liberty of governing, we will listen to their fears on this head. We are Americans as well as they, love our country as much, and have as much at stake as any one of them; for, in becoming a Catholic, we did not cease to be a man, a citizen, or a patriot; and we are as well convinced as we are that we are now writing, that the preservation and wholesome working of our democratic institutions depend on the general prevalence among our people of the Catholic religion. We say this not merely as the Catholic convert, but as the citizen who has not wholly neglected political and philosophical studies.

But it seems that "the character of the instruction imparted in our schools has nothing in it giving them a peculiar claim to popular favor, unless it be their prices."-p. 18. Perhaps the Doctor is not a competent judge. It is possible, also, that he is not acquainted with all the names the order has produced since its restoration, for we could mention some of the names which are at least "above mediocrity." As educators, the French University seems to stand in awe of them. The Doctor would do well to become acquainted with their schools, before undertaking to discuss their merits. Perhaps, were he to do so, he would not hazard the assertion, that "a graduate of one of these universities is not qualified to enter the junior class at Princeton, Yale, or any of the more respectable Protestant colleges of our land." The regular course of studies in our Jesuits' colleges is as thorough, as extensive, and of as high an order, as that of the best Protestant colleges, and those who take the regular and full course will have, on graduating, no occasion to regard themselves as inferior to the graduates of Protestant universities. University education in this country, whether by Catholics or Protestants, is, however, we are willing to admit, far from being what it should be. The characteristic of our people is to go ahead." We are impatient, averse to long, slow, and toilsome labor. What we cannot do quickly we will not do at all. We will not spend the time necessary to become thorough scholars; consequently

the whole scholarship of the country, with a few individual exceptions, is limited and superficial. The Jesuits cannot at once overcome this. Their education becomes necessarily in some degree Americanized, and is, no doubt, less thorough than it is generally abroad, or than it will be here when their colleges have had time to become more thoroughly established and are more liberally supported.

But be this as it may, the Jesuits' colleges are admirably adapted to the present wants of the Catholic population. They suit us very well, and whether they suit Protestants or not is a matter of small moment. We ourselves have four sons in the colleges of the Jesuits, and, in placing them there, we feel that we are discharging our duty as a father to them, and as a citizen to the country. We rest easy, for we feel they are where they will be trained up in the way they should go ; where their faith and morals will be cared for, which with us is the great thing. It is more especially for the moral and religious training which our children will receive from the good fathers that we esteem these colleges. Science, literature, the most varied and profound scholastic attainments, are worse than useless, where coupled with heresy, infidelity, or impiety.

As to the female schools under the charge of the Ursulines, the Sisters of Charity, of the Visitation, the Sacred Heart, &c., we want no better proof of their excellence than the simple fact, that Protestants, notwithstanding their prejudices against the religious orders, send, and are eager to send, their daughters to them, and feel that they are safe so long as under the more than maternal care of the good sisters. That it is not the price that induces Protestant parents to send their daughters to our schools is evident from the fact, that the project for a sort of female university, started by some good Protestant ladies, at Cincinnati, if we have not been misinformed, cannot be got under way for the want of scholars, notwithstanding the expense for the pupil is to be merely nominal. The institute has funds in abundance, ladies who are pledged to instruct gratuitously, and nothing is wanting but scholars. Unhappily, these cannot be got for either love or money.

The disparaging terms in which Dr. Potts speaks of the instruction imparted by the sisters are natural enough from a Presbyterian minister, but may be refuted at any time by a few minutes' conversation with a young lady educated in one of our female academies. There is something in the very atmosphere of the Catholic schools that gives an inexpressible charm

to the female character, which we have never found in a Protestant, not brought up in some degree under Catholic influence. There is a purity, a delicacy, a sweetness, a gentleness, a grace, a dignity, about a Catholic lady, that you shall look in vain for in a purely Protestant lady, however high-born or wellbred. It is only in the Catholic lady that woman appears in all her loveliness, worth, and glory. It is Catholicity that has wrought out woman's emancipation, elevated her from her former menial condition, rescued her from the harem of the voluptuary, and made her the companion, and not unfrequently more than the companion, of man. Every Catholic daughter has a model of excellence in the Blessed Virgin, and not in vain from earliest infancy is she taught to lisp Ave Maria, gratia plena, Dominus tecum; benedicta tu in mulieribus ; for the Holy Mother rains grace and sweetness on all who devote themselves to her honor and implore her protection.

The association with those who honor the Blessed Virgin, see in her the model of every female grace and every female virtue, and whom she honors with her special protection, is not without its chastening and hallowing influence, and the loveliest and the noblest Protestant ladies we have ever known are those who have been educated in Catholic schools. The good sisters have nothing to fear from the aspersions of Dr. Potts. Their pupils will speak for them, and constitute their defence. Yet, if Protestants do not like our schools, all we have to say is, let them go and institute better ones, if they can.

But enough. We have lingered too long upon this not very remarkable sermon; but as we have done little else than to make it the thread on which to string some observations, perhaps not wholly uncalled for nor inappropriate to the time and country, we hope we shall be forgiven. The Church may be assailed, will be assailed; but we know it is founded on a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. It is now firmly established in this country, and persecution will but cause it to thrive. Our countrymen may be grieved that it is so; but it is useless for them to kick against the decrees of Almighty God. They have had an open field and fair play for Protestantism. Here Protestantism has had free scope, has reigned without a rival, and proved what she could do, and that her best is evil; for the very good she boasts is not hers. A new day is dawning on this chosen land; a new chapter is about to open in our history, and the Church to assume her rightful position and influence. Ours shall yet be

come consecrated ground, and here the kingdom of God's dear Son shall be established. Our hills and valleys shall yet echo to the convent-bell. The cross shall be planted throughout the length and breadth of our land, and our happy sons and daughters shall drive away fear, shall drive away evil from our borders, with the echoes of their matin and vesper hymns. No matter who writes, who declaims, who intrigues, who is alarmed, or what leagues are formed, this is to be a Catholic country; and from Maine to Georgia, from the broad Atlantic to broader Pacific, the "clean Sacrifice" is to be offered daily for quick and dead.

ART. IV. — Methodist Quarterly Review for July, 1845. Art. VII. Brownson's Quarterly Review, No. V. 1845.

THE Methodist Quarterly Review for July, 1844, contained a paper on the literary policy of the Church of Rome; the avowed purpose of which was "to exhibit the proofs that the Church of Rome has ever waged a deadly warfare upon the liberty of the press, and upon literature; and that her expurgatory and prohibitory policy has been continued to the present hour; not only against the truth of revelation, but equally against the truth in nature and in science, both learning and religion having been the doomed victims of her perennial despotism." To this paper, so far as concerned hostility to the press, literature, and science, we replied in our Review for last January. To this reply of ours the article before us is a rejoinder, attempting to make good the original charges, notwithstanding what we alleged against them.

In our reply we retorted the charge of unfriendliness to literature upon the Methodists themselves, who, we said, had originally manifested a great contempt for human science and learning, and cannot, in this country at least, boast of having made a single permanent contribution either to literature or science. The Review thinks this charge is not true, for one Mr. Elliot has written "A Delineation of Roman Catholicism," which has even been republished in England. We confess, when we wrote, we had not heard of this work, and we have not yet seen it; but we will engage beforehand that it is nothing