and adoration due to the High and Mighty Lord God of the universe, it is enough that we present ourselves before him with minds distracted with the things of this world, and hearts afar off and at enmity against his laws, and alienated from his service. "Yes," says the Jesuit Bauny, as he who without the intention of committing idolatry should bow the knee before an idol, would, notwithstanding, be viewed as an idolater; so they who take part in the service ought to be considered as praying, though they may do it without attention ;"* but he must, nevertheless, observe that external decency and composure suitable to such an actt. Gobat, the Jesuit, also states most explicitly that "voluntary distractions do not destroy the essence of vocal prayer."

What can be more clear than the decision of Platelle, the Jesuit, on this subject? "It is more probable that no internal attention, either formal or virtual, is required in repeating the office."§ What more

demonstrative than the argument of Lorthioir the Jesuit? "To worship false gods, though it be with voluntary distraction, is a true act of idolatry ;

* In his Summary of Sins, chap. 20, p. 335, 6th edition.

+ Ibid., p. 336.

Essentiam vocalis orationis consistere cum voluntatis distractionibus.-Tom. i., tr. 5, n. 842 and 843.

§ Videtur probabilius nullam omnino requiri attentionem internam, neque formalem, neque virtualem.—In his abridged Course of Theology, part 3, parag. 1.

therefore, to pray to the Almighty with voluntary distraction of mind, is a truly religious act."*

"It may be observed," continues Lorthioir, "that a greater attention is not required in attending mass than in reciting our prayers; on the contrary, less attention suffices; for, as the theologians" state, “it is more difficult to repeat prayers by one's self, with attention, than to be present, with attention, when another prays and offers the sacrifice."+ "It must," he further tells us, "be laid down as a principle, that the other attention" (i. e., that which implies the application of the mind and heart to God) "is not necessary to the accomplishment of the duty."

"Yes," says Filliucius, "an evil intention in attending the mass, as, for example, the intention of gazing with a lascivious eye on the females who may be present, is not contrary to the commandment. Hence, he who goes with such an intention discharges the duty required, provided he be sufficiently attentive;"§ that is to say, supposing he be not outwardly rude.

*Falsos Deos colere cum voluntaria distractione, est verus actus idolatriæ. Ergo est verus actus religionis Deum cum voluntaria distractione orare.-In his Treatise on Moral Virtue, n. 817, dictated at the Seminary of Tournay, in the year 1707 or 8.

§ Prava intentio conjuncta voluntati audiendi missam, ut aspiciendi fœminas libidinose, dum modo sit sufficiens attentio, non est contraria huic præcepto, quare satisfacit.-Quest. Mor., tom. 1, tr. 5, c. 7, p. 128, col. 1, n. 212.

Escobar's language is equally shameful. He says, "An evil intention, as, for instance, that of looking with carnal eyes on the women who may be present, is not inconsistent with the duty of attending the mass.'

Busembaum, in his work entitled "The Marrow of Moral Theology," styled by his colleagues, the Jesuits, "an entirely golden work," expresses himself in a manner equally impious: "If any one," says he, “assist at the mass out of vain glory, or even for the purpose of picking another man's pocket, he may, notwithstanding, fulfil the duty, though these acts be in themselves criminal."†

This opinion was not peculiar to the Jesuits of former years, for those of more modern times perfectly agree with their predecessors on this point. "In fact," says Father La Croix, the commentator of Busembaum, " though you should attend the mass with an evil intention, you would not fail to fulfil your duty; as, for example, if you should attend principally from a motive of vain glory, or a wish to gratify yourself during the service by gazing with impure desire on a young woman who might be present, you would nevertheless obey the precept which

* Non obest alia prava intentio, ut aspiciendi libidinose fœminas, priori conjuncta.—Theol. Mor., tr. 1, ex. 2, c. 3, p. 231, n. 31.

+ Si quis intersit sacro, ob vanam gloriam, vel etiam ut furetur, potest nihilominus implere præceptam, etiam per actum ex circumstantiis peccaminosum.-Lib. 1, tr. 2, c. 3, d. 1, p. 31, n. 1, edit. 5.

requires your attendance. This is the decision of twenty very eminent authors cited by Pasqualigio and Gobat."* In conclusion, La Croix adds that, "notwithstanding these criminal intentions, we honour God, to whom the sacrifice is offered by the priest and the people."+

According, therefore, to the wholesome doctrine of these Jesuit fathers, love in the heart is not essential to obedience; because, to perform an act of religion we have only to bend the knee in the presence of God as we would in the presence of an idol; because "the duty of prayer is fulfilled with a voluntarily distracted mind, provided the exterior be decent and composed;" because we may assist at the holy mysteries through vain glory-with an intention to rob others or with the mind, heart, and eyes full of impurities and profane love; because, supposing a man appear modest to others, he honours God in diverting "§ himself during the mass with lascivious looks directed to the young females present; because, finally (mark this additional blasphemy), we may

66

66

* Etiam si intentioni audiendi missam adjungatur alia intentio mala, adhuc satisfacis præcepto; e. g. si vis audire missam, etiam principaliter ob vanam gloriam, aut simul volens te delectare turpi aspectu puellæ præsentis, satisfacis. Ita autores 20 omnino graves,

quos nominatim recenset.-Pasqualigo, q. 1313. Croix, tom. ii. 1, 3, part 1, p. 371, n. 636.

Gobat, n. 208.

La

+ Nam per hoc colitur Deus, cui per sacrificantem et assistentes immolatur sacrificium.—Ibid.

These are the expressions of F. Bauny.

§ Such is the term used by the Jesuit La Croix.

fulfil," say Father Schilder and Father Humbert de Precipian, since Archbishop of Malines, because ". we may fulfil the commandment of Jesus Christ by a sacrilegious communion, as well as by a sacrilegious baptism."*

ON ABSOLUTION OF SINS.

A GOD whose laws are obeyed by services in which the heart is not concerned, and even by acts of sacrilege and profanity-whom we honour by presenting ourselves before him with a totally depraved heart, provided we be outwardly modest and reserved -a God to whom we may pray as to an idol, namely, without any intention of rendering him homage or adoration, certainly cannot be severe towards sinners, and therefore it must be easy to make our peace with him, when we have committed an offence.

It is true that, formerly, sin was expiated by the tears and sorrows of a broken and contrite heart: but what simpletons were our penitents of those times to imagine that all this melancholy preparation of tears, travail, and rending of the heart was really

* In a Thesis entitled Synopsis Theologica de Sacramentes Ecclesia, which they defended at Louvain, Aug. 21, 1648, p. 15, col. 1, parag. 31. The following are their words: "Impletur præceptum Christi; sicut baptismo ita et communione sacrilega.'