Culture of the Will.

The object of the will is Good. Therefore its culture will be in proportion to its adhesion to that which is good.

We have been able while discussing the culture of the intellect, to make abstraction from the will, but we cannot, while treating of the will, leave the intellect altogether out of consideration. The intellect, will, and the memory are, as we have seen, but one and the same soul, and it is the soul that acts, now through one, and now through more than one of its faculties. Thus the reflection that two and two make four, is a pure effort of the intellect, unaccompanied by any motion whatever of the will; but the desire of having or doing anything always presupposes some apprehension that the thing is good. The intellect is, as it were, the eye, and the will the hand of the soul. If there were but those two noble faculties, there would be but little error and sin; for one would unerringly point out "good," and the other would have no obstacle to overcome before embracing it. But we are not pure spirits; we are "composed of soul and body," and as by the one we participate in the spiritual nature of the angel, so by the other we are chained to earth, and constrained to take our place among the animals. Our bodies are, like theirs, subject to heat and cold and hunger, and like them, we are urged by a powerful and blind instinct of self-preservation. But though we are animals, inasmuch as we have bodies and flesh animated by a vital, sentient principle, we are not beasts, actuated merely by this blind impulse, but above it and totally distinct from it, our souls are adorned by the noble gift of reason.

We have seen that the will cannot grasp its object, without having had some previous apprehension that it is good. This apprehension may come from the reason, or from this animal instinct. If it comes from the former, the will should at once embrace it; but if from the latter, the will should first examine, is this object, which is represented as good, really so. For the animal instinct conveys to the soul but one fact, that some things are pleasing and some things unpleasant. As the inferior animals follow blindly their brute instincts—they have indeed no other,—without being ever betrayed into excess, it is evident that all these impulses are regulated for them within proper bounds; while the deplorable effect on man of indulging his passions, shows that they are not regulated for us, but that we ourselves must rule them by the light of reason—"granting what they reasonably require, and refusing what they unreasonably demand."

The ravages of even a single vice—drunkenness for instance—show that, even without looking beyond the welfare of the body, the will must be accurately informed, not of what is most pleasing to the body but of what is really good for it.

But man is not alone in the world. He is a Citizen, and his duties are not confined to the care of the body; they regard his fellow-citizens, and those especially who are more intimately bound to him—a wife, a parent, a child. For their sakes he must often labour when he would wish to rest, and deny himself when he would wish to give himself up to enjoyment.

Finally, man is a "fellow-citizen of the Saints, and a servant of God." The society begun in this life should, in the design of God, continue in the next. But this can be only by our serving Him faithfully here on earth that we may hereafter see and enjoy Him forever in Heaven.

We are now in a position to judge how the will is to be cultivated. Our duties towards God and towards our neighbour demand Self-Denial. The senses insist upon Self-Indulgence. They utterly ignore our duty, all idea of the future, everything except their present gratification; and most fiercely and unceasingly do they press their unreasonable demands. Unfortunately, the intellect often allows itself to be rudely pushed aside by the furious passions that agitate the heart of man; and even when it urges on us our duty it frequently does it so feebly that "the evil which we will not, that we do." ^*

There are, therefore, two ways in which the will may fail to embrace what is good: cither by not having its duty kept constantly and clearly before it, or by lacking the courage to do what it sees to be right. What does worldly and what does Christian civilisation towards illumining and strengthening it?

Secularism bids us procure wealth wherewith to purchase pleasure!—Exactly as the senses do! The very utmost it does, is to commend the higher pleasures, and to condemn those which are purely animal. It neither teaches us our duty nor gives us strength to discharge it. It ignores it quite as much as our instincts do, but not being, like them, blind, it perceives that over-indulgence diminishes the capacity of gratification, and recommends a more lasting source of enjoyment. This consideration may preserve a cool, clear beaded, strong-willed man from excess—and for this I allow to secular civilisation whatever credit may be due to it—but here ends its influence. It will not make such a man a good Citizen; it will not train him to merit the place destined for him in the next life; it will do absolutely nothing for him but teach him how he may obtain the greatest amount of gratification in this world! and for the weak and foolish, who are easily led, that it is for those who most need assistance, that is for the majority of men, it does not even so much!

But Christianity bids us deny ourselves, take up our cross, and follow Christ. If the passions constantly importune us, it was constantly holds before our eyes the sublime truths of the supernatural order; it points out the appalling consequences of sin; it promises to virtue a "reward exceeding great," eternal, infinite; it teaches us to war upon our sinful passions and appetites, and provides a remedy against our weakness by prayer. It teaches us to be good Citizens, by commanding us to perform all the duties we owe our fellow-citizens. We are to "love, honour, and obey our parents and superiors; to provide for our children, to instruct them and all others under our care in the Christian Doctrine, and by every means in our power to lead them to God;" and, in fine, "to do unto men as we would that they should do unto us."

This is the grand law of Christian Civilisation. And observe there is only the one law for the Christian and for his neighbour; while there are two totally distinct for the Worldling and for his neighbour. We have already seen that the law for the Worldling himself is To Procure Wealth as a Means of Pleasure,

From this selfish law, we might readily conclude what that for his neighbour would be, but it will be instructive to examine it as laid down in theory by eminent Worldlings, and carried out in practice in certain highly civilised states.

All Secularists, even those who approve of the brutality I am about to expose, and who carry it out, will be displeased at the plainness with which things are called by their proper names; but the conclusions come home to all those who hold the premises. There is no use in certain pious Secularists, hoping that in some unaccountable way their children will learn to be good. The teachings of sensuality, and the maxims of the world go together, and these pious people will not allow their children to be taught that they must resist both.

The maxims and practice of secular civilisation are rapidly taking the world down to barbarism, to the immoral doctrine that Might is Right, and to the bestial theory of "natural selection."

"As you would that men should do unto you, do you Not unto them in like manner." (Luke vi. 31.—New reading.)

"If thou didst see a thief, thou didst run with him." (Psalm xlix. 18.)

"It is lawful for Achab to take the field of Naboth." (iii Kings, xxi.)

"And for the 'rich man who hath exceeding many sheep and oxen, to take the one little ewe lamb of the poor man.'" (ii. Kings, xxi.)

"If you see the strong oppress the weak, do Not interfere in the cause of justice, nor allow others to do so." (Maxim of a famous Worldling—Napoleon iii.)

"If a foul wrong has been perpetrated, do not permit it to be undone, but defend it as an 'accomplished fact.'" (Same.)

"Nature has allotted superiority of strength to superiority of intellect and character; and in deciding that the weaker shall obey the more powerful, she is in reality saving them from themselves, and then most confers true liberty when she seems most to be taking it away." (Mr. Froude.)

"A natural right to liberty irrespective of the ability to defend it, exists in nations as much as, and no more than in individuals." (Same.)

"A rude but adequate test of superiority and inferiority is provided in the relative strength of the different orders of human beings." (Same.)

"On the whole, and as a rule, superior strength is the equivalent of superior merit" (Same.)

"The right to desist depends upon the power (Same.)

Yes; Might is Right! The same law of the strong crushing out the weak, which "developed the protoplasm into the brute, and the brute into the man "^* holds yet; and advances man every day to still loftier development. It is folly to speak of "brute force." But for the "brutality" of our apish ancestors, we should be still "brutes," and the more "brutal" we are, the more perfect we shall become. It is a folly to talk of crime. There is no such thing. What we foolishly call crime, is in reality but the carrying out of the admirable law of superior might, which has made us what we are. This being the theory, see how many things which we foolishly looked on as crimes crying to Heaven, for vengeance, suddenly become chivalrous deeds of civilisation! The proverbial brutality of the Irish landlord becomes a villainous slander. Bishop Plunket and Mr. Adair were of course quite right in turning out their miserable tenants to shiver and if they liked, die in the snow. ^† So are all the other landlords. With the law at their back, who will question their irresistibility? and being irresistible, who can doubt of their "superior merit?"

The Jews were right in stoning the prophets and crucifying Our Lord: and the wolves into the midst of which He has sent His sheep, are justified in devouring them.

Here is a deed which meets with the special approbation of Worldlings, and which in a special manner uncivilises society.

"The Government backed by the overwhelming majority of the Legislature, have set their face against the aggregation in monasteries of large numbers of men, who temporarily lead thorougly idle and purposeless lives, who enjoy large revenues for which they make no return whatever, and who keep considerable tracts of land either entirely out of cultivation or else not more than half tilled. The Italians believe that by a process somewhat similar to that which took place in England during the reign of Henry VIII.—with this exception, that the soil has been resumed by the nation instead of being handed over in fee simple to certain favoured nobles—the land which formerly belonged to the monastic establishments will be probably used instead of being abused as heretofore, and that the productive powers of the nation will be enormously increased by the drones being converted into working bees. Of course a considerate amount of human suffering has been caused by the suppression of the monasteries, and many painful talcs are told of the poverty and destitution of monks turned out of the homes in which they had resided Half a Century, and Left to Die by the Way-Side. But the Italian authorities seem to have acted generally with kindnesss and forbearance, though I am afraid that a certain amount of human wretchedness is inevitable before any great reform can be completed."^‡

Resumed by the Nation! ! !

Why?

Is there any greater enormity in a poor man's idleness, than a rich one's? What is the reason why the one should be punished for the abuse of his poverty, and the other should not be punished for the abuse of his riches?

"Resumed by the Nation! ! ! "

How?

Is the "nation" something distinct from the people who compose it? Are not the poor "drones" a part of it, just as much as the rich ones? Have they not the right to live under a roof—under their own roof—like the rest of the Nation? The poor women "drones" have paid their marriage dowers into the convents, for their own maintenance, and the "Nation resumes" (!) these dowers, and turns the women out to die by the wayside!

To die by the way-side!

Everyone knows the touching story of the captive who was set free in his old age, and who implored to be allowed to return and end his days in the prisonwhich had become his Home! Imagine the sufferings of these poor men and women—aye women too! who entered these convents as children; who have led within them for "half a century" the lives of children; and who with their child-like inexperience and failing powers, are turned out of their Home to die in their old age by the way-side! ! !

Men may assemble night after night, in the devil's name, to squander in drunkenness, the money they should spend on their families; they may pour into each other's polluted ears the language of Hell, till they sink upon the ground, a spectacle loath-

^* Lord Beaconsfield tells us that this doctrine is lisped by the young ladies in the gilded saloons in London.

^† Mr. Adair depopulated a small tract of country because a number of his sheep were killed. It was not established that a single one of his victims had ever wronged him. But it Was established that his own shepherds had unlimited supplies of mutton, and a bonus of 10s. for every sheep "found" killed. (See Mr A. M. Sullivan's "New Ireland). Bishop Plunket cleared out a village because the Catholics would not send their children to proselytising schools.

^‡ Travelling Contributor of Age, Sept. 12,1874.

The Capitals are mine.—Everyone knows that the monks have ever been most successful tillers of the soil, and reclaimers of barren wastes; that wherever there are monasteries, the poor are cared for without expense to the State, and that Italy, from a garden of paradise, is sinking to the condition of Ireland.

page 15 some enough to make the demon himself turn aside and shudder; yet as long as they observe in their disorders, certain precautions sufficient to keep them clear of the law, they are not "drones" and the State recognises and respects their right to damn their souls!

But if these same men had had the foolish thought of "assembling together in the name of Jesus Christ, that he might be there in the midst of them;" if instead of bestowing on their sinful appetites and lusts every possible gratification, they mortified them by fasting, and by a continence so severe that it is believed by some to be impossible; if instead of sitting up at night, to pour out and drink in the foul promptings of unbridled passions, they were to rise from their hard couch at midnight to sing the praises of God, then they would evidently be "drones," and it would be the duty of a "kind and forbearing" Government to reform their evil ways, to turn them out of their Homes in which they had resided half a century, and leave them to die by the way-side!

Oh shame on the civilisation that does such deeds, and shame on the civilisation that records them without a blush or a word of disapproval!

And if, my Protestant fellow citizen, whose eye these words may chance to meet, if you should think that I am a "partisan," you, at all events, are not; will you, then, say, by what right the man who has many palaces, turns out of their Home into the streets, hundreds of poor men and poor women who have but one Home among them? How is it that he should have a right to what does not belong to him, and they should have no right to what is theirs? How, if it be lawful for the ruler to dispossess those who live in community, that they may be poor and mortified, it should not be lawful for him to seize the property of those who associate in the pursuit of pleasure and wealth!

Use your reason. Do not allow crime to be palmed on you, under a high-sounding name, for virtue. Call robbery, persecution, and barbarity by their proper names.

Conscience and common sense declare that these deeds are evil—that Worldlings guided by worldly maxims, hate and persecute those who are not of the World, because they are not of the World, and their poverty, humility, mortification and chastity are a reproach to the World; just as Cain slew his brother Abel, "because his own works were wicked, and his brother's just."

Drones!

There are two gates whereby principally the souls of unhappy men stream into hell—impurity and inordinate love of wealth. Christ was poor and was a virgin, and in His Church there have always been numbers of men and women who voluntarily embraced poverty and virginity. They are not "drones." They stand on the very Highest Pinnacle of Christian Civilisation, because the whole object of their lives is to nourish their intellects with the highest Truth, and to bind their mil every day more strongly to the highest Good. They are the Very Best of citizens, because by their example they allay the feverish greed of wealth, and raise the standard of purity. ^*

Occasionally an immoral Priest is to be found who not only tosses to the winds his vows, but glories in his apostasy. The unseemingly eagerness with which he is sure to be taken up by those who hate us is as amazing to us as it is disgraceful to them. Now those degraded beings who glory in the violation of their vows, and their shameless admirers, who, under pretence of horrifying themselves piously at our wickedness, go, in reality to feast like ghouls on the corruption set before them are the Very Worst of citizens.

Therefore, while Christianity cultivates the mind of the individual, by implanting supernatural truths, and civilises society by inculcating the sublime axioms of the Gospel, this godless, worldly system "prostrates" the soul in "ignorance" of aught beyond this world; and uncivilises society by inculcating maxims that aim at the destruction of "good-citizenship." If a Christian does wrong, he does what his own principles and his own conscience condemn, but what is to restrain the Worldling, to whom worldly axioms render all things lawful? If the Christian is a good citizen, he is so because of his Christianity. If a Worldling is a good citizen, it is in spite of his secularism.

Let us turn from this worldly civilisation (!) to the truth once more.