Rememberest thou of that dear wife, While gathering wild flowers in the grove, So sweet! Heart clung to heart, and Helen's love Flew mine to meet? Oh! give my Helen back to me ! My mountain! and my old oak tree ! Memory and pain where'er I rove, Entwine Dear country! with my heart's deep love Around thy shrine ! AURORA. FIRS CURRENT EVENTS. IRST in importance among current events, in relation to Canada, may be placed the sermon preached by the Jesuit Father Braun, at the golden wedding (fiftieth ordination anniversary) of Monseigneur Bourget, Roman Catholic Bishop of Montreal. In former days when the conflict respecting representation was going on, Quebec was more familiar than dear to British Canada; since Confederation she has been more dear than familiar. Many people in Ontario are scarcely conscious of the fact that, while religious equality reigns in their own Province, Quebec is under the dominion of what is virtually a Church Establishment, not only possessed of enormous wealth in the shape of real estate, but levying upon the Roman Catholic population tithes and other ecclesiastical imposts, the burden of which is severely felt by the people, and probably has almost as great an effect as the over-population or the exhaustion of the soil in inducing large numbers of French Canadians to emigrate annually into the United States. Quebec is, ecclesiastically as well as socially and politically, a section of the Catholic and Monarchical France which existed before the Revolution; and the Church has, till recently, retained the Gallican character of the Church of Louis XIV. At least it has been national and not Ultramontane. But there has recently come, over the whole Roman Catholic Church a change which its supporters will regard as the commencement of a new life, its opponents, as the immediate precursor of dissolution. Disestablished, or stripped of the greater portion of their vast endowments in the principal Roman Catholic countries of Europe, and deprived of the political support of the old Catholic monarchies, whose thrones are now occupied by more liberal dynasties or by presidents of democratic republics, no longer able to make the powers of the world their ministers, and the civil sword their executioner, the clergy of the Church of Rome have been laity and to clerical marriage has never ceased to exist. The exhibition of that most portentous relic, the Holy Coat of Trèves, some thirty years ago, offended, in like manner, the Teutonic love of truth, and produ more and more detaching themselves from all national connection and allegiance, rallying round their ecclesiastical centre, exalting the doctrinal supremacy of the Pope, and extending the jurisdiction of the Court of Rome. War has been waged by the Ultra-ced the great secession of which Ronge was montane party against every remnant of ecclesiastical independence or national character in the Churches. The old Gallican Missal has been expelled and the Roman Missal, the symbol and vehicle of Ultramontane influence has been introduced in its stead. You vainly ask at a religious bookstore in France for the ancient symbol of the National Church. A similar process has been going on in all other Roman Catholic Churches. Among the Roman Catholics of England, the party which reconciled loyalty to the British Crown with attachment to the ancient faith, and which, in former days, took up arms against the Armada has given way to the ascendancy of the party which, conspired with Spain, the party of Campion and Guy Fawkes, the party which openly avows that its allegiance is paid in the second place to England, but in the first place to Rome. This Ultramontane and centralizing movement seemed to culminate, and the highest point, either of auspicious development, or of blasphemous usurpation, appeared to have been reached, in the declation of Papal Infallibility. But there is reason to think that beyond that apparent summit there is in prospect one at least still higher-a declaration of the "hypostatic union" of the Holy Ghost with the Pope. This more than despotic centralization and the outrages to reason which the doctrinal part of it involves of necessity cause recalcitration and secession, especially in Germany, where the spirit of Teutonic independence prevails, where the Reformation was at first accepted by the whole country, though afterwards driven from portions of it by political and military force, and where even among the Roman Catholics a tendency to utraquism, or the concession of the cup to the the chief. But, in spite of recalcitration and would be educated, not as Irishmen, but on the model of that debased Italian type which has shut itself up in the Vatican, and there exhibits itself as the perfection of Christian sanctity and truth.” most faithful and zealous sons of the Church of Rome, approaching the Bishop with their congratulations were dismissed with contumely by the prelate, inflated apparently by the flattery of his Jesuit wire-pullers, who do not scruple to apply to his Ultramontane encroachments the terms consecrated by the Gospel to the ministry of the Saviour. Addresses were presented from religious bodies under Jesuit influence tuned to the division of the parish. After an imposing service in the Church of Notre Dame, the great Jesuit preacher, Father Braun, mounted the pulpit and, under the name of a sermon, delivered the harangue against the Gallicans and Liberal Catholics to which we have specially called attention, and which was understood to have been concerted with the Bishop and the other heads of the Jesuit party. Our readers will excuse the length of the following extracts in consideration of their great importance, as revelations of the principles of the Jesuits and of the objects of their machinations, not only in French Canada but in all countries.* "Every one knows the fatal doctrines which infect European communities, and which have penetrated into this vast continent, which they are already laying waste. These errors, whose object is to consummate the work begun by Luther and Henry VIII., bear, for the most The Church, in the eyes of modern Governpart, upon the Church, its nature, and its rights ments, is no more considered as a Society complete, independent of the State, having of itsel the rights confided to it by its Divine Founder; right of self-government; right of possessing and administering property; right of making laws binding upon the conscience, and to which the State should submit; right of being the only power that can define the invalidating the form of marriage, that can judge matrimo impediments to marriage, that can determine nial cases to pronounce upon the validity of the conjugal tie; right of erecting parishes independently of the State; right of superintending The French Canadian Church has hitherto been Gallican, at least not Ultramontane, being confirmed in a moderate course perhaps by the comparative security of its political position as well as by its remoteness from the principal scene of conflict. But now its turn has come. The Jesuits, the great propagators of Papal dominion, which is, in fact, their own, have appeared in force upon the scene, and are labouring with their usual activity and cunning to suppress the ecclesiastical liberties of French Canada, and at the same time to recover the power and wealth possessed in the Province by their Order before its temporary suppression. The character of Bishop Bourget has made him a facile tool in their hands; and another tool has been found in the Bishop of Three Rivers. The Archbishop of Quebec and the other French Bishops are understood still to resist Jesuit domination and to cleave to the liberties of their national church. But the main citadel of resistance to the Jesuits, and the mark of their most strenuous and rancorous attacks is the great Sulpician Seminary, which rises over Montreal, at once the most powerful support and the most sumptuous monument of the Gallican Church. To the Seminary has hitherto been attached the sole pastoral care of the vast parish of Montreal, with the ecclesiastical revenues belonging to it. And to wrest first the pastoral jurisdiction, and then the revenues from the Seminary, is the immediate object of Jesuit intrigue. The Bishop has been instigated to divide the parish; the Seminary stands on its legal rights. In the midst of this conflict occurred the Bishop's golden wedding, which was made the occasion of a Jesuit and Ultramontane demonstration against the Sulpicians and the Gallicans generally. A deputation of Gallican gentlemen, who were We quote from the version published at the time, it was understood by authority, in the Montreal Herald. The Gallican refuses to obey the Pope, he arms himself against him with the protection of the powers of this earth, he grants to the civil power, that protects him in his rebellion, all the authority which he refuses to the Sovereign Pontiff. Hence it comes that everywhere Gallicans are the flatterers of civil power, and have the Bishop or the Sovereign Pontiff alone, should examine, judge and pronounce. It is this insubordination towards the Holy Father, and this servility towards civil power, which Pope Innocent XI. so justly stigmatized in a Brief of the 11th April, 1682, to the Bishops that composed the Assembly of the French Clergy." * * * * and directing education in public schools. People do not consider any more that the heads of nations and their legislalators owe submission respect and obedience to the Church, just as much as the humblest citizens, and that the more elevated they are in the eyes of men, the more formidable account will they have to render to God for their want of respect and sub-recourse to it even in ecclesiastical cases, when mission to the laws of Holy Church. People do not consider any more that the State is united to the Church, only when it obeys the Church in all that is amenable to ecclesiastical authority, and that the State is in duty bound to protect the Church. Notions about the State and Government have been reduced to mere abstractions, and by this convenient process, people think they have succeeded in freeing those who govern from all responsibility before the Church and before God. But God and the Church make no account of these empty systems. In the eyes of God, the Government is they who govern. Each of them is responsible before Him, for the acts of his administration. They shall be judged, condemned and punished for everything they will have done against the sacred laws and the independence of the Church. In fine, now-a-days, God is no more looked upon as the source of right and the fountain-head of justice; but the State, the many, the majority, claims to be the source and principle of right and of justice, and it is taken for granted that, under pretext of public utilities, the majority that governs may impose its wishes. It is the old Pagan despotism. Do not might and the majority constitute the right in the eyes of modern wisdom? And it must needs be said, we see Governments led astray by these false principles, commit flagrant injustices towards individuals. Every one Every one knows what is going on in Germany. And the besotted peoples adore Might and the majority; behold in the modern Right the modern God. All that is materially useful to a society is not therefore permissible, not more to Governments than to individuals. Finally to sum up: God, as a modern politician lately said, has nothing to do with affairs of State. Galli-ing down the principle of Communism. Speak canism and Liberal Catholicism have powerfully contributed to propagate all these errors. Gallicanism is, in ecclesiastical affairs, insubordination towards the Holy Father, servility toward civil power, despotism towards inferiors. "With respect to despotism towards their inferiors, Gallicans, when there is a question of doing justice, pay no attention to the canons. Their own will, and what they call their common sense, hold the place of law for them. Arbitrary measures, such is their rule. It is well known that, in some dioceses, many Catholic writers, through obedience to the wishes of the Holy See, having handled with great talent, questions contrary to the Gallican notions of some Superiors, were exposed to severe penalties, and that the Holy Father himself was obliged to take their defence and protect them against an unjust punishment. Liberal Catholics acknowledge that the individual, in his private life, ought to profess the Catholic religion; and at the same time, they think it advisable that he should, in his public life, admit an equality of rights for truth and for error. Liberalism is a so-called generosity towards error; it is a readiness to yield on the score of principles. Liberal Catholics grant to the State the right of requiring that parishes, bishoprics and religious orders be civilly incorporated, that they may have a right to hold property. They grant that the State has a right to limit the possessions of the Church, to make laws for regulating the administration of Church property. They grant to the State the right of taking possession of Church property and of keeping it, thus lay of restitution to these sacrilegious usurpers, their only answer will be a sneer. Liberal Catholics pretend that the State can prescribe the form of marriage, define invalidating impediments, and pronounce upon the conjugal tie in matrimonial cases. Liberal Catholics confine to the Statethe superintendence and direction of primary schools, to the detriment of the Church and fathers of families. Liberal Catholics grant to the State the right of intervening in the erecting of parishes, independently of any authorization from the Holy See. These errors were gaining ground in the country, were causing the Church to lose its independence, and threatening soon to place her on the same footing as the so-called Church created by Henry VIII. And the Christian people, accustomed to the encroachments of the State, were beginning to think that all these sacrilegious encroachments were real rights of the State, and that it was a duty for the Church to recognize them. One must fight with all the arms of doctrine against these fatal errors which threaten to pervert all minds. Among the most valiant defenders of the rights of the Holy Church, we shall always see our venerable Pontiff. Whilst these false doctrines are spreading and gaining strength everywhere, the venerable Bishops of Canada assemble in Council at Quebec. What will be their first thought? their first effort? The shackles of the Church must be riven asunder, its independence must be proclaimed in the face of the country and of the Catholic world, and the Bishops, assisted by the Holy Ghost, animated with a holy zeal, burning with love for the Church, issue this decree: De obedientiâ Summo Pontifice, of obedience to the Sovereign Pontiff : a decree which will be to the end of time, one of the finest monuments of the history of the Catholic Church in Canada, and will be for ever the glory of the venerable Fathers of the Council who were its authors. They profess the most entire obedience to the Sovereign Pontiff, by proclaiming that the laws which they make concerning the general discipline of the Church are binding in this country, independently of the sanction of civil authority. Therefore, we adhere with our whole heart to all the Constitutions which concern-the dogma, and to each one in particular, and also to those which concern-the general discipline of the Church; and we declare and teach that, not depending on any sanction of the secular power, they must be recognized by all the faithful as the rules both of faith and conscience. His Lordship hastened to make known to his clergy and people this decree of the Council, which is to put an end to those divergences of opinion which were dividing Catholics. This decree, says he, settles this great question, to wit: whether the Apostolical Constitutions, when once published in Rome, in due form, are binding in this country. The clergy and the faithful share the Bishop's sentiments, all are unanimous in repeating the words of the Council: Toto animo adhæremus omnibus et singulis apostolicis Constitutionibus. In future every upright and logical man, enlightened by the zeal of the Bishop and his clergy, will say: Yes, we most heartily adhere to the Constitutions of the Church. Yes, they bind in conscience independently of the sanction of the State. Therefore the Church is an independent society. Every one admits this principle. The State is subordinate to the Church. This truth is admitted. No one now dares to deny these two Catholic dogmas. But many, for want of a logical turn of mind, do not see the consequences which flow from these principles, and dare to doubt them. But the day we trust is near at hand, when Government repudiating their errors, will at length recognise the truths proclaimed by the first Council of Quebec. The laws of the Church itself enact the ecclesiastical laws, without any recourse to the State, and it is the duty of the State to recognise those laws and submit to them. The Church can, inasmuch as it thinks proper require from the State a civil sanction for the laws. This sanction adds no new obligation to the law, but helps the execution thereof. In this case it is not a bill, a draft of a law, which the Church proposes to the examination and discussion of a Parliament, it is a law already made, and which the Church alone has a right to make, a law which is already binding on the conscience, independently of the sanction of the State, and for which the Church claims a purely civil protection and sanction. The State does not enact the law, nor does it discuss the same; this is beyond its jurisdiction. It simply sanctions it civilly, just as the Church proposes it, without having the right to change, omit or add anything. Would you pretend to submit to your judgment and discussion the legislative authority of the Holy Church. If the State is Christian it will grant to these laws this civil sanction which the Church requires. This is the only manner in which the State can interfere in |