Choose a topic from Vol 2:


Proof of God's existence
God's nature
Supreme control over all things and the problem of suffering and evil


Destiny of man
Immortality of man's soul
Pre-existence denied
The human free will
Determinism absurd


Necessity of religion
Salvation of the soul
Voice of science
Religious racketeers
Divine revelation
Revealed mysteries
Existence of miracles

The Religion of the Bible

Gospels historical
Missing Books of the Bible
The Bible inspired
Biblical account of creation
New Testament problems
Supposed contradictions in Sacred Scripture

The Christian Faith

Source of Christian teaching
Jewish rejection of Christ
Christianity a new religion
Rational foundation for belief
Causes of unbelief

A Definite Christian Faith

Divisions amongst Christians
Schisms unjustified
Facing the problem
The wrong approach
Is one religion as good as another?
Obligation of inquiry
Charity and tolerance

The Protestant Reformation

Meaning of "Protestant"
Causes of the Reformation
Catholic reaction
Reformers mistaken
The idealization of Protestantism
The Catholic estimate

The Truth of Catholicism

Meaning of the word "Church"
Origin of the Church
The Catholic claim
The Roman hierarchy
The Pope
The Petrine text
St. Peter's supremacy
St. Peter in Rome
Temporal power
Unity of the Church
Holiness of the Church
Catholicity of the Church
Apostolicity of the Church
Indefectibility of the Church
Obligation to be a Catholic

The Church and the Bible

Catholic attitude towards the Bible
Is Bible reading forbidden to Catholics?
Protestant Bibles
The Catholic Douay Version
Principle of private interpretation
Need of Tradition
The teaching authority of the Catholic Church

The Dogmas of the Church

Revolt against dogma
Value of a Creed
The divine gift of Faith
Faith and reason
The "Dark Ages"
The claims of science
The Holy Trinity
Creation and evolution
Grace and salvation
The Sacraments
Holy Eucharist
The Sacrifice of the Mass
Holy Communion
The Catholic Priesthood
Marriage and divorce
Extreme Unction
The resurrection of the body
The end of the world

The Church and Her Moral Teachings

The Inquisition
Other superstitions
Attendance at Mass
Sex education
Attitude to "Free Love"

The Church in Her Worship

Magnificent edifices
Lavish ritual
Women in Church
Catholics and "Mother's Day"
Liturgical Days
Burial rites
Candles and votive lamps
The rosary
Lourdes water
The Scapular

The Church and Social Welfare

Social influence of the Church
The education question
The Church and world distress
Catholic attitude towards Capitalism
The remedy for social ills
Communism condemned
The Fascist State
Morality of war
May individuals become soldiers?
The Church and peace
Capital punishment
Catholic Action

Comparative Study of Non-Catholic Denominations

Defections from the Catholic Church
Coptic Church
Greek Orthodox Church
Anglican Episcopal Church
The "Free" or "Nonconformist" Churches
Church of Christ
Seventh Day Adventists
Plymouth Brethren
Catholic Apostolic Church or Irvingites
Salvation Army
Christian Science
British Israelism
Liberal Catholics
Witnesses of Jehovah
Buchmanism or the "Oxford Group Movement"
From Protestantism to Catholicism

To and From Rome

Conversion of Cardinal Newman
Why Gladstone refrained
The peculiar case of Lord Halifax
Gibbon the historian
Secession of Father Chiniquy
Father Tyrrell, the modernist
Bishop Garrett's departure
Judgment on lapsed Catholics
Protestant apathy towards conversion of Catholics
Principles for converts to Catholicism
God's will that all should become Catholics

The Church and world distress

1096. The real business of life is to alter the form of society, by revolution if necessary, and give everybody a fair share of the good things kept by the lucky few. So please discuss that.

Altering the form of society will be useless unless you alter the human beings composing that society. Give everybody an equal share of the "good things of this world" tomorrow, and inequalities will at once begin to develop. Envy, jealousy, dishonesty, laziness, dissipation, immorality, imprudence, and every kind of excess, will still be there. Some will accumulate, others recklessly scatter and waste their possessions. Moreover, a sudden and radical change by revolution is more certain to cause immense suffering than it is likely to produce any benefits for anybody. Christianity, which works on the innermost heart of man, is the only thing that can remedy the ills of the world today. And it is significant that the multiplication of miseries we all deplore has accompanied a wholesale driftage from the Christian religion in practice. A return to genuine Christianity is the one real remedy. And that means a return to the Catholic Faith and the observance of its moral obligations.

1097. Will you agree that the masses are in a starving condition after the preaching of the wonderful Gospel for 2000 years?

No. I agree that sections of the masses are poverty stricken, and that some members of these sections are reduced practically to starvation point. But it is an obvious exaggeration to say, without any qualification, that the masses are starving. Again, the fact that many—and far too many—are not so well provided for as they should be after 2000 years of Gospel preaching does not necessarily argue to any fault in the Gospel preached. At most it argues to the fact that many ignore the Gospel; or that, whilst acknowledging its truth, they fail to put its principles into practice. But I am not called upon to defend the conduct of those who don't believe in the Gospel, nor of those who do profess to believe, yet don't attempt to live up to it. If you condemn them, I can only join you in condemning them for their attitude. And that, just as I would have to condemn you if, whilst blaming others, you yourself failed to observe personally what the Gospel demands of you.

1098. Is not poverty the enemy of God?

Not necessarily. When the Eternal Son of God came into this world He embraced poverty, and promised special blessings to the poor. If anything, He condemned the other extreme of wealth, and declared that riches are much more likely to take men from God than poverty.At the same time, a great deal of the poverty in this world is due to the injustice of the rich. And that injustice is undoubtedly the enemy of God. Again, abject poverty can be, and often is, the occasion of temptations to crime. And in this sense, poverty could be regarded as the enemy of God.

1099. If poverty be in any way the enemy of God, why do we Christians hesitate in abolishing it?

Men will never succeed in abolishing poverty entirely. Our Lord has said, "The poor you will always have with you." But that does not alter the fact that there are far too many poor, and that the cause of their poverty is not according to God's will. Why, then, do we Christians hesitate in abolishing this excessive poverty of so many people? For the simple reason that the vast majority of those who are really Christians are amongst the very poor whose lot is to be remedied. In other words, we Christians have not within our hands the means whereby we can abolish such injustice. Our Lord warned us that the more money a man gets, the less likely he is to be a good Christian. And the wealth of the world is concentrated in the hands of rich men who have no Christian inspiration to use their power for the alleviation of poverty, and the bettering of the lot of the poor at what they regard as their own expense. It is because they won't obey Christian principles that the poor also abandon Christian principles, turn Communist, and proceed to take by force what the rich unjustly reserve for themselves. It takes a lot of Christian principle on the part of the poor to refrain from Communism, and appeal to social justice by constitutional means, whilst those who control the goods of this world are quite deaf to the claims of social justice.

1100. In a recent reply you said that the poor shall be always with us. Why? Is it because the Churches want the poor to be kept poor?

That is not the reason. I was not expressing a wish. I was stating a fact; or rather, I was quoting the very words of Christ predicting the fact that there would always be poverty for some people in this world.

1101. The evidence I have shows no benefits conferred on society by the Church.

If that be so, the evidence you have is inadequate, and secured from non-Catholic sources only. And you cannot expect non-Catholic authors to give space to Catholic beneficial activities.

1102. I mean not only the Church of Rome, but Protestant Churches, too.

I am not here to defend any form of professed Christianity other than the Catholic Church.

1103. The worst blots on our society have been agitated against by those outside the Churches, including my own—the Church of England.

When you say "our society" you are probably judging in the light of that section of the world which is predominantly Protestant. People have often boasted that Protestantism ushered in a new and glorious society, and that Protestantism was responsible for building up our present civilization. If people want to flog that civilization and dwell upon its evils, let them be consistent and still exclude the Catholic Church from responsibility. Since the Reformation, at least, the voice of the Catholic Church has been consistently ignored in Protestant countries. The Church of England was the creation of the English throne, and a state department, with more affinity for the Lords than for the commoners, and with little interest in the workers and the downtrodden. Catholics were despised and persecuted, andexcluded from all influential political positions. They were not in a position to agitate against the blots in the post-reformation society of Protestant countries.

1104. I have in mind child labor, and the abolition of slavery.

Child labor flourished chiefly in England where Protestantism had the influence. Against it, Catholic authorities uttered protests to which Protestants would not listen, and wrote books which Protestants would not read. The first real recognition the Catholic attitude received in England was in the person of Cardinal Manning—who merely dwelt upon principles formulated by the Pope.As regards slavery, you can have no objection to the Catholic Church when you advert to the facts.Slavery was deeply interwoven with the Roman civilization when the Church first began her work. The Church labored to better the lot of slaves from the beginning. She taught their equal human dignity; worked for their emancipation; ordained them as priests; and by the year 225 had a fugitive slave as Pope. She urged those owners who were converted to Christianity to release their slaves; and within 200 years of Constantine's conversion she had practically eradicated the pagan concept of slavery. Later in history the inroads of Mahometanism revived slavery, for the Moors regarded it as a duty to enslave captive Christians. Religious Orders sprang up dedicated to the ransom of slaves, and from 1198 to 1632 the Trinitarians and the Order of Mercy redeemed from slavery over 1,400,000 slaves.When Spain and Portugal captured their American colonies, the Popes did their utmost to prevent slavery. Pius II., in 1482, Paul III., in 1537, Urban VIII., in 1639, and Benedict XIV. in 1741—all actively denounced and resisted slavery. Gregory XVI. and Leo XIII. both fought the later African slave trade. But it was chiefly being fostered in American colonies founded from Protestant England; and remember that Catholics themselves were not emancipated from penal laws in England until 1829.

1105. When these evils were rife, the Church was in a powerful position, yet did not denounce these tragedies.

The Catholic Church was not in a powerful position, and had little opportunity in the Protestant atmosphere of England and America at the time of which you speak. In fact, Catholics were treated practically as the slaves whose lot you bemoan. The Catholic Church denounced the abuses you mention; but her denunciations received no attention in Protestant countries. I do not defend the Protestant Church which was dominant, but I deny that it was truly representative of Christianity.

1106. The Church adopts the same attitude today towards social evils; or only touches them when they affect her as an institution.

That remark shows that you are quite unfamiliar with what the Catholic Church has done and is doing in the social sphere today.

1107. The Church will be forced to take cognizance of these evils, or lose her status entirely.

The Catholic Church is fully cognizant of all the evils you have in mind. Nor is she in the least fearful for her own future. She is conscious that she was established some 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ Who promised that by His divine power and protection she would last all days even to the end of the world. And I scarcely think she will have greater obstacles to meet in the future than those she has survived in the past.

1108. The Christian Churches of the world, including the Roman Catholic Church, have a more or less large following in the so-called civilized countries.

They have.

1109. Presumably they have a first-hand knowledge of the terrible conditions of the poor in those countries.

They have.

1110. Why do not all the Churches in general, and the Roman Catholic Church in particular, make some real effort to eradicate these evils?

I cannot speak on behalf of other Churches. The Catholic Church in particular has made real efforts to eradicate the evil. But pronouncements by the Catholic Church are not heeded nor given publicity in non-Catholic countries, nor in Capitalist countries. Religious prejudice and the resentment of Capitalists whose injustice has been condemned combine in a conspiracy to silence. And for the most part the Catholic protest reaches only Catholics amongst those whose lot should be remedied, not those able to remedy it.

1111. Why not bring pressure to bear on the respective Governments?

In what way? Moral condemnation leaves them cold. Would you advise the Church to organize political opposition or armed rebellion? And if she did either, would you undertake her defense against the howl of execration from her enemies, or join in with them?

1112. Instead, they are happy to say prayers, hand out a little charity here and there, and do much talking, with little or no real action.

Can you really blame any Church for happiness at prayer, the chief act of religion? The reference to "handing out a little charity here and there" is a niggardly tribute above all to the Catholic body which distributes millions of dollars yearly subscribed by people already bled dry by the unjust burden of double taxation for the education of their children. The "real action" you think the Church should undertake I cannot discuss until you inform me of the nature of the activity you have in mind.



Prefer a PRINT version?