Put Your Arrow On
Scripture Reference;
Wait Three Seconds,
Scripture Appears!
ALWAYS Read Bible!








Cambridge Comprehensive Bible Dictionary™
By The Cambridge Theological Seminary™ USA





Comprehensive Bible Dictionary




Understanding the Future According to "HIS WORD",
Understanding History - Providentially - as "HIS-STORY!"
And Today, From Where We've Been, To Where God's Leading!"



FACT: Wikipedia is the "World's Most-Referenced Resource!"
FACT: We Recognize Wikipedia's Great Success

See Founder Jimmy Wales on CELEBRATED ATHEIST PAGE]


"CHRISTIPEDIA™ Recommendation!

Use Conservapedia, Theopedia, Biblipedia, Islamipedia;
Scriptipedia, Ameripedia, Christipedia, Musicipedia, etc;
We plead for support toChristian Researchers, Scholars

"CHRISTIPEDIA™" is a “Trademark” Of NewtonStein Academy,
Of Cambridge Theological Seminary™, American Bible Church;
The Web

God's Eternal Guarantee!

"Heaven and Earth Shall Pass Away;
But GOD'S WORDS Shall NOT Pass Away! (Matthew 5:18) "
--Jesus the Messiah, AD-33



    Statement On Holy Scriptures;

    The ‘Lens’ Through Which All Knowledge Is Understood;


    "IF" there exists any such thing as 'The Word of God'; [and ALL evidence proves such does exist:]

    "THEN" by inherent definition - it must be:

      Holy, Inspired, Inerrant, Intrepid, Infallible, Infinitive, Invincible, Indestructible, Inexhaustible, Inalienable, Immutable, Implacable, Impossible-to-Improve: Eternal and Indubitable NEVER FAILING and ALL CONQUERING!

      DEDUCTING from the simple fact - that God equates His Word with Himself:

        "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, . . ." John 1:1 (and other Scriptures),
    Thus 'GOD'S WORD' can have no lesser standard than stated above;


      As true in history, archeology, geography, Earth science, medical science, nutrition, gerontology, agriculture, botany, astronomy, physics, chemistry, climatology, government, law, psychology, sociology - and every subject it touches - as in Theology, Divinity and Doctrine:

    And "IF IT BE NOT" - true in all subjects mentioned above; and And "IF IT BE NOT"

      Holy, Inspired, Inerrant, Intrepid, Infallible, Infinitive, Invincible, Indestructible, Inexhaustible, Inalienable, Immutable, Implacable, Impossible-to-Improve: Eternal and Indubitable in EVERY FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE:
    Whatever else it may be, it cannot be ‘The Incomparable Word’ of the Great Creator God!


Do You Qualify for
An Honorary "Doctor of Divinity" from Cambridge Theological Seminary?
If you believe God's Word as Stated Above:
(Click for a Free Evaluation)

Please Visit Top Webpages


[1] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "GREAT COMMISSION MANDATE!” Some Sobering Questions; (Very Brief!)

[2] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – "God’s Goals” v. “Satan’s Goals” – WHO WINS? (Very Brief!)

[3] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Greatest PLAN of Evangelization DO THE MATH, Part-1 (Very Brief!)

[4] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –Jesus said: “I WILL Build MY Church!”
(But Did He Really Mean It?)

[5] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Alarming Church News! USA! (Brief)

[6] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christ’s Commission: Does it Mean “Global Domination?”

[7] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Can You Face The Truth? Part-2 (MESSAGE)

[8] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Can You Face The Truth? Part-2 (MESSAGE)

[9] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Jesus and Paul on the “End-of-the-World” by-NewtonStein

[10] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - Conservative Activists: "Who's Who in Christian Conservative Politics?

[11] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Is Our Modern Church Ignorant of Christ’s Purpose?

[12] "RAPTURE-READY™" – Why Jesus did not come back in 2009! (Do you Know?)

[13] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Preachers’ Greatest Sin: (Are You guilty?)

[14] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christ Warns: A “Five-Fold-Question!”

[15] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – OPEN LETTER to Our Fellow Laborers

[16] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Are All Denominations Wrong? Mostly?

[17] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Who Will save Christianity?

[18] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – A Workable Plan that would-Truly Revive Christianity!

[19] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "American Christianity Rides The Titanic!

[20] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Founding Fathers’ Kingdom, Now Dominion!

[21] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Great Falling Away Prophesied by Apostle Paul!

[22] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Biblical End of World, Basic Terms and Concepts

[23] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christianity Is Dying In Western Civilization: WHY?

[24] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christian Myths! Do You Believe Them?

[25] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Church Growth Goals Priority Page

[26] "RAPTURE-READY™" – Modern Christianity Is A Mess!

[27] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – The “Anti-Christ Home Page

[28] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – TOP-TEN Messages To Maximize Your Ministry

[29] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Calling All Christians Unite, Christ Commands!

[30] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christianity Is Confusing and Getting WORSE! WHY?

[31] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Every-Minister A Hero

[32] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Legal Abortion: Is It Good for Christians?

[33] " CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Southern Baptists Dying: WHY?

[34] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Satan’s TOP-TEN Greatest-Lies! Do You Believe Any?

[35] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –Truth Test-3 Questions For Christians

[36] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Evangelicals Call for Government School Exodus!

[37] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Hall of Faith Christian Activist Ministers, 2nd-half 20th Century "

[38] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –The Early Christian-Church Outlaws Homosexuality!


[40] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Our GOD-GIVEN Rights, Guaranteed in the Bible: Called “Civil” and “Human” Rights

[41] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Rush Limbaugh Quotes" on Christ and Christianity!

[42] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"

[43] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "GREAT COMMISSION MANDATE!" Some Sobering Questions;

[44] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Hall of Faith Christian Activist Ministers, 2nd-half 20th Century "

[45] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –The Early Christian-Church Outlaws Homosexuality!


[47] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Our GOD-GIVEN Rights, Guaranteed in the Bible: Called “Civil” and “Human” Rights

[48] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Rush Limbaugh Quotes" on Christ and Christianity!

[49] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"

[50] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"







By Cambridge Theological Seminary,

From the Inspired, Inerrant View of God's Word!

Combining the best Bible Dictionaries of Yester-year,



Simply Move Your "ARROW" over any Scripture Reference

Wait three Seconds and the Scripture will appear!

Do You Qualify for
An Honorary "Doctor of Divinity" from Cambridge Theological Seminary?
If you believe God's Word as Stated Above:
(Click for a Free Evaluation)


The "Cambridge Comprehensive Bible Dictionary™"

Edited, Supplemented, Amplified

By NewtonStein;

Cambridge Theological Seminary™

(See Also The Cambridge Concise Bible Dictionary™)


    — 1. King of Geth. Supported Hanon, King of the Ammonites, against David. The latter defeated them both. 2. One of the wives of David and mother of Absalom.

Mabillon (John) (1632-1707).
    — Born at St. Pierremont, Ardennes, France; died at Paris. A noted French scholar and his- torian, a member of the Benedictine Order. His works include Acta Sanctorum ordi- nis S. Benedicti (1675-1685), De re dip- lomatica (1681), Museum Italicum (1687- 1689), etc.

Macarius (St.) of Egypt or the Elder (300-390).
    Born in Upper Egypt, monk of the Thebaid. He was ordained priest in 340. We have extant of his writings fifty homilies, or exhortations to monks. Macarius (St.) of Alexandria, or the Younger (306-395). Monk in the solitude of Nitria in Egypt, suffered persecution on account of his adherence to the symbol of Nice. He has left some ascetical works.

    — A large country and region lying north of Greece proper, bounded on the south by Thessaly and Epirus ; east, by Thrace and the yEgean sea; west, by the Adriatic sea and Illyria, and north, by Dardania and Mcesia. Its most cele- brated mountains were Olympus and Athos. The Macedonians under Philip and Alexander the Great, subdued Greece, and became one of the most powerful nations of antiquity. The Romans at length divided the whole of Greece and Macedonia into two great provinces, which they called Macedonia and Achaia. In the New Testament the name is probably to be taken in the latter sense.

    — Heresiarch, named pa- triarch of Constantinople by the Arians in 342, he was replaced, in 347, by the Catholic Bishop Paulus. Replaced on the patri- archal see in 350, he remained thereon only until 360, at which time the Arians themselves deposed him. Then he became the head of a sect which denied the divin- ity of the Holy Ghost.

Machabees {Books of the).
    — We possess no continuous history of the events which occurred among the Jews during the four hundred years which elapsed between the death of Nehemiah, who rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem, and the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. All the record we possess regarding that long lapse of time is contained in the two books of Machabees, which narrate the fierce struggles of the faithful Jews against impiety. If this period of their history is not the most prosperous, it is certainly the most glorious;

    for during it, the body of the people remained faithful to the practice of the laws of God. About this time, prophets ceased to appear among the Jews, and their office was replaced by the priests and the scribes, whose special duty it was to preserve their inspired writings and explain them.

    They, with the gallant Machabees, were the instruments used by Providence to guard the people of God against the false Doctrines of the Greek philosophers, just as it had been preserved by prophets during the captivity from the contagion of idolatry.

    uring the period of which we speak, the Jews were subject to the Persians, the Syrians, and the Egyptians, and through constant intercourse with their conquerors, either at home or abroad, they, or at least many of them, were induced to unite the doctrines of Moses with the philosophy and heathen practices of the Greeks.

    Those who remained faithful to the old traditions were called Assideans, the unfaithful were named iniquity or sinners. The Assideans were the true friends of their country, the Hellenists were the friends and supporters of the Egyptians or of the Syrians.

    A moment came when the wicked nearly destroyed the true religion and caused paganism to triumph over it. Then it was that the God of Israel raised up the Machabees, who saved both their country and their religion. These heroic men are sometimes called Asmonaeans from one Asmonaeus, their ancestor.

Machabees (The).

    — Name of seven brothers, sons of Eleazar, whom Antiochus Epiphanes wished to force to adore the idols and to eat pork meat. Upon their refusal, this prince caused them to be killed by the most atrocious torments, as well as their mother Salome, who did not cease to uphold their courage, while they were executed, 168 B. C.

    The Church honors them as martyrs. F. Aug. ist.

Machabeus (Jonathas).
    — High-priest, brother of the following, died in 144 b. c. Acknowledged high-priest by the usurper Alexander Bula, he placed himself at the head of the Jews after the death of Judas, expelled Bacchides from Judea, upheld the pretensions of Demetrius Nicator, then of Alexander VI. to the throne of Syria, and was assassinated by Tryphon, tutor of the latter.

Machabeus (Judas).
    — Jewish warrior, son of Mathathias, died in 160 b. c. He succeeded his father in the commandry of the army of Israel, 167 b. c, successively defeated Apollonius, lieutenant of Anti- ochus, near Samaria, Seron, Syrian general, at Bethoron ; the generals Ptolemy, Nicanor, and Gorgias, sent by Lysias, gov- ernor of Syria in the absence of Antiochus, and Lysias himself.

    He purified the Temple of Jerusalem, profaned by Antiochus, and restored, therein, the worship of the true God. Antiochus Eupator made peace with him. Under Demetrius Soter (161), he conquered Bacchides and Nicanor. But attacked anew by Bacchides, he lost his life after an heroic battle.

Machabeus (Simon)
    . — Brother of Jonathas Machabeus, died in 135 B.C. Acknowledged high-priest by Demetrius Nicator, he made an alliance with the Romans ; expelled the Syrians from Jerusalem; procured the independence of Judea, after the victory over Antiochus VII., surnamed Sidetes by his sons, Judas and John Hyrcanus, and was assassinated with two of his sons, Judas and Mathathias, by his son-in-law Ptolemy, governor of Jericho.

    — An Arabian tribe settled in the northern part of the Syro- Arabian desert. In Gen. xxv. 2 the Madianites are represented as descendants of Abraham and Cethura. They harassed the Israel- ites in the period of the Judges, crossing the Jordan with their hordes and despoil- ing the country, until they were defeated by Gedeon. They disappeared more and more from history, and are mentioned only as a trading people (Is. Ix. 6.).

    Magdala. — In the Old Testament, a town in Palestine, situated on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee ; the modern El-Mejdel. Country of St. Mary Mag- dalen.

Magdalene (St. Mary).
    — According to an old tradition, St. Mary Magdalen was the sister of Martha and Lazarus, and was that sinner who anointed the Saviour's feet.

    After her conversion, she became the most faithful and zealous servant of the Lord. She stood with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Mary, the wife of Cleophas, under the Cross ; she was first at the sepulchre after the Sabbath, and there saw Jesus, whom she thought to be a gardener, until He kindly made Himself known to her, and commanded her to announce the news of His resurrection to the Apostles and disciples.

    She came into Provence, Gaul, with Lazarus and Martha, and passed the rest of her days at St. Baume, in penance, prayer, and contemplation. F. July 22d.

    Magdalen de Pazzi (St. Mary) (1566- 1607). — Religious, born and died at Flor- ence. Of the illustrious family of the Pazzi, allied to the Medicis; she took the veil in 1582, at the Carmilites. She was canonized in 1669.

    Mageddo. — Town of ancient Palestine, in the northern tribe of Manasses. Cap- tured by Josias, king of Juda and by Nechao, king of Egypt in 610 B. c. In the Roman period, this city changed its name to that of Legio, and appears to have been, then, of great importance.

    Magi. — According to the Gospel of St. Matthew (ii. i, 2) the three kings from the East, who came to adore the new-born Saviour at Bethlehem. Most probably they came from Mesopotamia. Tradition qualifies them as kings and tells us that they were three in number: Caspar, Bal- thazar, and Melchior. A mysterious star served them as guide. When the Apostle St. Thomas went to preach the Gospel in their country, they were still living. In- structed, baptized, and consecrated bishops by him, they exercised the apostolic func- tions in Eastern countries, and obtained the crown of martyrdom. Cologne possesses, since 1162, some relics of the Magi, which are held in great veneration by the inhabit- ants of that city.

    Magic and Spiritualism. — Magic, or the production of extraordinary effects by unnatural means; and spiritualism, or in- tercourse with spirits by the aid of medi- ums or table-rappings, must necessarily be a communication with the evil one, who produces false appearances and impres- sions. " The soul that shall go aside after




    magicians and soothsayers" (Lev. xx. 6) is condemned by God.

    Magnificat. — Canticle of the Blessed Virgin, sung at Vespers, and which com- mences with the word Magnificat, and which the Mother of God sang upon the occasion of her visit to her cousin Eliza- beth (Luke i. 46).

    Magog and Gog. — According to Ezech. (xxxviii. and xxxix.), Gog was a ruler in the land of Magog, and is mentioned as the prince of Mesa and Tubal. In Apoc. (xx. 8), Gog and Magog appear as two allied warring tribes. They were formerly regarded as connected with the invasion of the Scythians in Western Asia, but of late Gog has been identified with Gagu, referred to in the annals of the Assyrian king Asurbanipal (668-626 b.c.) as the mighty ruler of a warlike tribe in the ter- ritory of Sahi, north of Assyria.

    Mahomet. See Mohammedanism.

    Mai (Angelo) (1782-1854). — Jesuit and cardinal, born at Schilpario, province of Bergamo, died at Albano. Attached to the Ambrosian Library of Milan, he dis- covered, in examining the palimfsesies, a number of unpublished works and frag- ments of ancient authors. Named by Pius VIL, in 1819, librarian of the Vatican, he discovered therein the greater part of the Republic of Cicero ; secretary in 1833 of the Propaganda, cardinal in 1838.

    Maid of Orleans. See Joan of Arc.

    Malachias (Hebr. messenger of the Lord). — The last of the twelve minor Prophets, of the tribe of Zabulon, born at Sopha. He was a contemporary of Nehe- mias, and prophesied, it is believed, from 412 to 408 B. c. We have from him three chapters, wherein he reproaches the Jews on account of their corruption, and an- nounces the Messias. Some Jewish doc- tors confound him with Esdras.

    Malachy (St.) (1094-1148). — Malachy, born at Armagh, was a disciple of St. Mal- chus, Bishop of Lismore. After he had rebuilt the great Abbey of Bangor, which, by his care again became a flourishing seminary of piety and learning, he was named to the bishopric of Down, and afterwards elevated to the primatial chair of Armagh. While in this high station, Malachy introduced many reforms, and, by his zeal and still more by his holy ex- 28

    ample, wrought a great change through- out Ireland. In 1137, he resigned his primatial dignity, consecrated Gelasius, in his place, another bishop for Connor, and reserved for himself the small see of Down. To procure the papal sanction for his re- forms, and also to obtain the pallium for the metropolitan of Armagh and Cashel, St. Malachy undertook a journey to Rome, in 1 139. Pope Innocent II. received him with mark of the highest distinction, and appointed him Apostolic Legate for Ire- land, but deferred the concession of the palliums to a future period. After his re- turn, St. Malachy discharged his office of legate with characteristic devotedness, which resulted in much fruit, visiting every part of the island and holding syn- ods. With the aid of the monks who had taken the Cistercian habit at Clairvaux, he founded the Cistercian Abbey of Melli- font, in Louth, which was the first of that order in Ireland. In 1148, he held the great Synod of Holmpatrick, and under- took a second journey to Rome, but came only as far as Clairvaux where he died in the arms of his illustrious friend, St. Ber- nard. F. Nov. 3d. As to the Prophecies, attributed to St. Malachy, see Popes ( Future) .

    Malchus. — Servant of Caiphas, had his ear cut off by St. Peter, at the moment when he laid hands on our divine Saviour in the Garden of Olives.

    Maldonatus (John) (1534-1583). — Jesuit and theologian, born at Estramadura. He was an excellent Greek and Hebrew scholar and a fine historian. Taught, with great success, philosophy and theology in Paris, and at the University of Pont-a-Mousson, France. Wrongly accused of Socinianism, he retired to Rome (1575) where he assisted at the edition of the Bible of the Septua- gint. He died at Rome,

    Mambre. — Name of a valley of Pales- tine between Hebron and Jerusalem, where the Patriarch Abraham resided for some time.

    Mamertus (St.). — Archbishop of Vienne, about 463, died about 477. Established in his diocese (469) the processions and pub- lic prayers called Rogations, to ask from God the cessation of the plagues that rav- aged Vienne and Dauphine.

    Mammon. — A Chaldaic word signifying riches, used twice by our Lord (Matt. vi.




    24; Luke xvi. 9-1 1). It never was the name of a personal being, though to those who set their heart on it, wealth, is as much an idol as Baal and Astarte.

    Man {from the scientific point of I'/Vw). — They deny to-day, in the name of a false science, all that Scripture teaches us about the first man. It is our purpose to answer briefly all the objections they make against the Sacred Books, when treating the fol- lowing three questions : I. Was the first man an intermediary being between the animal and the existing man? 2. Was he a savage ? 3. In what period did he make his appearance?

    I. The Animal Origin of Man. — For the adherents of Monism, who admit with all its consequences the evolutionary theory, and reject all idea of creation, there has not been a first man, properly speaking. The transformation which ended in giving to one or several animals placed among favorable conditions the characteristics that distinguish us, has been so insensible, that it is impossible not only to fix the date of the appearance of our species, but even to tell what individual was its first representative. The principal champion of contemporary Darwinism, Haeckel, formally tells us that this change "took place with such slowness, that we cannot in any manner, speak of a first man."

    The famous professor of Jena teaches, how- ever, that the species which preceded ours, and to which we owe existence, belonged to the ape family, the first of the order of Quadrumanes. The man ape whom they have called more learnedly, the fithecan- thropusy or anthrofofithecus (de Mortil- let), would have lived about the end of the Tertiary epoch, perhaps even earlier, ac- cording to de Mortillet, who attributes to him the so-called wrought flints of the Miocene strata of Thenay, in France. It was an anthropoid, a brother of the exist- ing anthropoids, but approaching man closer in his anatomical or physiological characteristics ; for nobody pretends to- day to derive us from apes belonging to the contemporary fauna, so considerable is the distance that separates us from them.

    The opinion of Darwin, author of the evolutionary system most in vogue, does not differ in this respect from that of his disciple Haeckel. It was, the English naturalist tells us in a summary, a hairy mammifer, provided with a tail and pointed

    ears, who undoubtedly lived on the trees and inhabited the ancient continent.

    However, we have to admit that all the opponents of the creation of man do not make us descend from the ape. It seems that in the eyes cf a great number of them, it would be rendering us too great an honor to attribute this origin to our spe- cies ; it is at a lower stage, at best among the marsupials or the didelphiae, that we must look for our ancestors. They at least acknowledge that the laws which preside over the general development of beings are opposed to our descending from any quadrumane whatever. This is the opinion of Professors Huxley, of England, Filippi, of Italy, and Vogt, of Switzerland, al- though the latter seemed sometimes to make our ancestor the existing ape; and one day, perhaps in a moment of humor, he is alleged to have said that he preferred to be " rather a perfectioned monkey, than a degenerated Adam."

    We have rather to do then with the ani- mal origin of man than with his simian origin. However, this point is of little importance ; for, whatever may be the dif- ferent views that separate them in regard to the human genealogy, our adversaries have recourse to the same arguments when there is question of proving their general thesis : the derivation of man from a lower type. We can, therefore, borrow these arguments from Darwin himself, the head of the party.

    These pretended proofs are of three kinds. They consist: i. In the general conformation of the body of man ; 2. In the development of the human embryo ; 3. In the presence in man of rudimentary organs. Let us expose them briefly.

    First Objection. — "It is well known," says Darwin, " that man is built after the same general type, after the same model, as the other mammifera. All the bones of his skeleton are comparable with the cor- responding bones of an ape, of a bat, or of a seal. It is the same with his muscles, nerves, blood vessels, and internal viscera. The brain, the most important of all, fol- lows the same law. . . . Man, BischoflF has said, approaches nearer to the anthro- pomorphous apes in the anatomical char- acteristics of his brain than the latter approach not only other mammifera, but even certain quadrumanes, she-monkeys and dog-faced monkeys."

    Man, adds Darwin, has the same ail- ments as the lower animals. He can re-




    ceive and communicate madness, smallpox, the glanders, etc., " a fact which evidently proves the great similarity of their tissues and blood." Apes are subject to a great number of other sicknesses : catarrh and phthisis, for instance. They share our taste for coflfee, tea, and spirituous liquors. We have seen them drunk from brandy, wine, and strong beer. " These facts prove," he tells us, " how much alike are the nerves of taste in man and apes, and how the entire nervous system is similarly affected."

    Second Objection. — Man is developed from an egg which differs in nothing from that of other animals. The embryo itself, in an early period, can hardly be distin- guished from that of other members of the kingdom of vertebrates. As proof of what he advances, Darwin gives a double figure representing the embryo of a man and that of a dog, which hardly differ except in the unequal development of certain parts.

    The English naturalist adds — and his disciples have insisted still more than him- self on this argument — that the human embryo presents more marked successive analogies, in proportion to its develop- ment, with diverse classes of animals, com- mencing naturally with the lower ones.

    Third Objection. — The organs which Darwin calls rudimentary, or simply rudi- ments, are useless organs, and generally little developed, whose presence is ex- plained, according to him, only because man has inherited them from ancestors in whom, on the contrary, they were devel- oped and had their reason of being. Sev- eral muscles would be of this class, among others, those which in animals serve to move the external ear, and which in the orangs and chimpanzees are already out of use and atrophied. The third eyelid, or nictitate membrane, which permits the birds to rapidly cover the eyeball, also ex- ists in the rudimentary state in man as well as in the quadrumanes and most of the mammifera. We might say as much of the sense of smell, which renders such great service to certain animals, either by warning them of danger (ruminants), or by enabling them to discover their prey (carnivora), and which in man is almost useless. The scattered hair on man's body, the down with which the human foetus is entirely covered at the sixth month, would be equally a remnant of the hairy integu- ment of the animals from which we are de-

    rived. The vermiform appendix of the caecum (blind gut), a kind of blind alley to-day without use, and even hurtful, since it is the cause of some ailments, would also be a remnant and a witness of the same organ, very much developed, how- ever, which exists in certain herbivorous mammifera, where it has its function to fulfill. The skeleton furnishes facts of the same nature, whether in the coccyx bone, which represents in us the tail of the mam- mifera, or in the perforation which we accidently meet in the human humerus, especially anKjng the ancient races, and which normally exists in the ape. To un- derstand these anomalies, " it is enough," says Darwin, "to suppose that a remote ancestor possessed the organs in question in a perfect state, and that, under the in- fluence of a change in the vital habits, they had the tendency to disappear through the want of use or on account of natural selection." (Darwin, The Descent of Man.)

    Answer. — We have summed up as faith- fully as possible, and without taking away anything of their force, the arguments which Darwin brings forward in support of the evolutionary theory applied to our species; it is not our intention to answer them in detail. Space does not permit this, and it would be quite useless. Indeed, running over the above short exposition of them, our readers must have seen that they present nothing new, that the physical re- semblance of man to the animal was some- thing known a long time, and of a nature to set off still more the infinite superiority of the human soul, because, with almost like organs, our species has raised itself far above the beast. A word, however, on each of the groups of the arguments ap- pealed to by Darwin.

    I. In the first place the English natural- ist purposely exaggerates our exterior re- semblance to the animal. Anatomically man is a mammifer and nothing more ; this we have long known. Each bone of our skeleton has its analogy in the skeleton of the ape. However, it is not less true that all these bones have their peculiar charac- ter, their fades, which will permit an ex- perienced anatomist to recognize them at a glance. And this is only the least of the physical features that distinguish us. Alone among the mammifera, man is organized for the vertical attitude ; he alone has two hands and two feet. His dentition and the nakedness of his skin again distinguish him




    from the ape, whose teeth are real instru- ments of defense and whose skin is remark- ably shaggy, especially on the dorsal part, which in man is the most wanting in hair. How can the fact of the disappearance of this hairy covering be explained, which, according to the evolutionists, protected our ancestor against the inclemency of the seasons ? The Darwinist doctrine pretends to explain, it is true, the acquisition of the useful variations ; but everyone will ac- knowledge that the latter is not of the number. This nakedness is so little in- dicative of progress for man, that under every climate he believes himself obliged to supply this lost protection by the use of clothing. Logically, Darwin ought to have made the ape descend from man rather than man from the ape.

    It is also very wrong for him to seek in the brain an argument in support of his theory. The weight of the brain, com- pared with that of the body, is three times more considerable in man than in the ape. The circumvolutions are also deeper, and, which is a remarkable thing, the circum- volutions develop themselves in an inverted order in the two cases. In man, they ap- pear at first on the forehead, while in the ape those of the middle lobe delineate themselves first. The Darwinists have not yet been able to explain this anomaly, which denotes quite a different origin. "It is evident, especially according to the most fundamental principles of the Dar- winist doctrine," remarks Quatrefages, '* that an organized being cannot descend from another being whose development follows an inverse process of its own. Con- sequently, man cannot, according to these same principles, count among his ances- tors a simian type."

    After this we are permitted to pass over the other characteristic features of our species. They must, however, be well de- fined, because Cuvier and other naturalists, who, in general classification of beings, have kept account only of the exterior characters, have been led to make of man not only a species, but a family, even a class apart. Is there in nature a single other being of which one can say the same?

    This simple remark constitutes a suffi- cient answer to those who pretend that one cannot logically explain the transforma- tion of animals without extending it to man himself. All the animals are suffi- ciently connected with one another. Es-

    pecially since the rise of paleontology, through the association of the fossil species with the existing species, we can fill up a great number of gaps that existed in the general series of beings. Few species con- stitute in themselves alone so many distinct kinds to form families, and families to form classes. Man alone forms an excep- tion to this rule, and, as we shall see, paleontology has only confirmed his isola- tion. What would a man be were we to take into consideration his intellectual faculties? Then it would be not only a family or an isolated class that he would constitute but a kingdom, because reason, which distinguishes him, elevates him not less above the animal than sensibilitv, which distinguishes the latter and elevates it above the plant.

    We think it useless to take up the con- siderations of Darwin in regard to the identity of the ailments that attack both man and animal, and the identity of the remedies that cure both. To be aston- ished at these traits of resemblance, one forgets that all organized beings have been created according to the same general plan and obey the same physical laws.

    2. The argument drawn from the em- bryogenic development offers little diffi- culty. It is true that man starts out by an ovule, like all animals ; to believe Haeckel, the human embryo, in develop- ing itself, would be in turn a zo-ophite, a fish, a batrachian, a reptile, and a mam- mifer; but these alleged successive states are more than contestable, and, "if they were real, they would have no bearing on the origin of man.

    First, they are contestable. Indeed, in order to convince us, it is not enough that Haeckel affirms these states. For we know that good faith is not the dominant quality of the professor of Jena. It is proved to-day that, to render more strik- ing the resemblance of the embryos of man and animal, he greatly altered the cuts which pretend to represent them in one of his books. This was long ago re- marked in Germany. Dr. Jousset estab- lishes " an enormous difference " between the human embryo, pictured by Haeckel, and that which is represented in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Medical Sciences. He adds that the embryo of the chicken, which Haeckel compares with the human embryo, presents a development and " rudimentary buds," which it has not in reality, but which result in accentuating




    its resemblance to the human embryo. It can be seen that we have good reasons for not believing the word of the German pro- fessor.

    In the judgment of the most competent naturalists, the similarities alleged are purely illusive. That there are certain analogies between the successive states that the embryo assumes, and the different groups of the animal series, we do not dis- pute ; but from simple analogy to a com- plete resemblance is a long distance. "At no moment of its existence," says Gratio- let, the famous anatomist, " does man resemble any other species. ... In all the stages of foetal life, man is man potentially, and definite characteristics distinguish him. The forms of the embryo have a re- markable relation to the future forms, they are complicated, it is true, but according to a specific mode ; in a word, at all times, the future man reveals himself. . . . At no time, does the brain of the human foetus absolutely resemble that of an ape; far from it. The greater its development, the more marked is the difference."

    Although these are facts, and not mere personal impressions, it might be objected that Gratiolet allowed himself to be in- fluenced by his prejudices in favor of the fixity of species, and the superiority of human nature. This reproach will not be made to Carl Vogt, one of the champions of evolution and of free thought. Now Carl Vogt protests still more energetically than Gratiolet against the pretended similarities of the human embyro, and that of the lower animals. "It has been supposed," he says, " that the embryos must run through in abridgment, the same phases which the stratum has run through during its development in the geological epochs. This law, which I long believed to be well founded, is absolutely false in its basis. An attentive study of embryology proves, indeed, that the embryos have certain har- mony, although very different from those of adults." For example, the professor of Geneva quotes the alleged form of fish which the embryo of the mammifer tem- porarily assumes, and he remarks that " a similar being could not live," seeing that the embryo has in this state " neither in- testines, nor locomotive organs, nor brain, nor organs of the senses proper to the ex- ercise of their functions." {'■'■ Revue Sci- entifique,'" Oct. i6th, 1886.)

    Those, therefore, who have claimed that the human embryo represents by turns the

    different groups of the animal series, com- mencing with the zo-ophites, have been greatly deceived. Undoubtedly, there is progression in the foetal life ; consequently, there is a passage through a series of phases which remind us of the ascending ladder we remark in nature ; but the human being has never an identical resemblance with any other being. Besides, if such were the reality, we might ask what would this prove from the point of view of man's origin. What necessary relation is there between these transitory states and the alleged phases through which our species might have passed anteriorly.? One would be so much the less authorized to conclude from the one to the other, because by the avowal of an evolutionist who is at the same time an eminent geologist, Albert Gaudry, " paleontology, which must be questioned first in such matters, is not far from having furnished the proof that the mammifer does not descend from the rep- tile, nor the reptile from the fish."

    3. The rudimentary organs will not de- tain us long. We may say of these organs what we have said of the pretended embry- onic phases : they have neither the impor- tance nor the significance attributed to them. Their presence in man is explained by the simple consideration that all organ- ized beings are subject to the same physio- logical laws.

    The argument which they oppose to us has the defect of proving too much. The rudimentary organs are so numerous and of such a different nature in man, and they resemble in this respect so many animals in which they have their complete devel- opment, that, if they were to suppose an identity of origin, we would have to con- clude that man has passed anteriorly through all the classes of the vertebrates. Now, who will believe, for instance, that he counts birds among his ancestors, be- cause he possesses in the embryonic state the nictitate membrane.? One would arrive at stranger consequences were he to pre- tend to see in these rudiments a remnant of organs developed and utilized in a prior state. The atrophied breasts which males possess in the class of the mammifera are certainly rudimentary organs and the most striking of all. Must we conclude from this that formerly the males were females.? These rudimentary organs are common to all animals and until now it never entered anyone's mind to see in them traces of an anterior state. So it




    is that the embryo of the whale is pos- sessed of teeth which never succeed in piercing the gums. It is the same with the incisors with which the calf is pro- vided in the foetal state. Does this mean that the whale and the bull passed through anterior states in which they were pro- vided with teeth of which they are de- prived to-day.? Evolutionists themselves would hardly dare to assert this.

    The olecranial perforation of the hu- merus alleged by Darwin has not, in every case, the significance which the English naturalist attaches to it. According to an unprejudiced anthropologist, George Herve, it cannot be looked upon as a simian characteristic peculiar to certain inferior races. " We meet with it as often among the higher races as among the lower races, and its existence is every whit as variable as among the animals." The same author elsewhere says that this perforation is much more rare in the Merovingian sepulchres than in the modern sepulchres. It is, there- fore, false to say, as do most of the evolu- tionists, that it is so much the more frequent as we draw nearer the beginning of man- kind. Like the phases of the embryonic life, the rudimentary organs prove once more that a general plan has presided at the creation. They do not prove anything else.

    So we see that of all the arguments al- leged by Darwin in support of his thesis, none has the force which their author at- tributes to them. We need not be surprised then, that the work which contained the development thereof, the treatise on the Descent of Man, caused a certain disap- pointment among the evolutionists. " We imagined that this work would be of much greater importance," wrote an admirer of the English naturalist shortly after its pub- lication. " We would not be candid with our readers if we did not confess that these volumes are in no respect comparable to any of the preceding books of Mr. Dar- win. ... In regard to the origin of man, they contain less than we had ex- pected, and the proofs brought forward in support of that thesis are hardly stronger than those we knew before." ("The Popu- lar Science Review," July, 1871.)

    There would have been for Darwin an- other means of proving his thesis, namely, to point out in the superficial strata of the earth the fossil skeleton of one of these an- thropoids who were, according to his the- ory, the precursors of our species. The

    famous naturalist was careful not to have recourse to this argument. He knew very well that paleontology has revealed noth- ing of this sort. He does not even dare to put the question, for fear that the answer might prove fatal to his system. Is it not strange, indeed, that none of the numerous links which, according to this system, ought to connect man to the lower animals has thus far been found, and that the ad- herents of the animal origin of our species are reduced to the necessity of making our more or less simian precursors live on some ancient continent submerged to-day.? What are we to think of a theory which, in order to support itself, appeals to the unknown, and is based only on conjectures and wholly gratuitous hypotheses?

    Evolutionists flattered themselves, for a time, that they had discovered one of these precious links so ardently desired, but looked for in vain. The ver}' incom- plete remains of a large monkey had been discovered in 1856 in the south of France. The paleontologist, Edward Lartet, found in this anthropoid, which was named Dryopithecus, characteristics superior to those of the existing anthropoids. It was hastily concluded that one of the ancestors of man had at length beeen discovered. Unfortunately for the theorists of the evo- lutionary school, a jawbone of the same animal, more complete and better pre- served than the preceding, was recently discovered in the Miocene layers of Saint- Gaudens, France. Albert Gaudry, to whom it was sent, and who minutely de- scribed it in a learned memoir read before the Geological Society of France, does not hesitate to acknowledge that the animal to which it belonged was very inferior to the present large monkeys. Gaudry' s avowal has so much the more merit because in a previous publication he had expressed the idea that perhaps it was to the Dryopithe- cus we owe the shape of flints, apparently hand-worked, which were discovered in the Tertiary grounds. " To-day, having become a little less ignorant," he adds, with a frankness that honors the learned paleontologist, " I would not make use of the same language. To judge from the state of our knowledge, there was not in Europe, in the Tertiary times, either a man or any creature that resembled him Since the Dryopithecus is the most ele- vated of the large fossil monkeys discov- ered until now, we have to acknowledge that paleontology has not yet furnished




    any indication of the connecting link be- tween man and the animals."

    Thus, we see, the missing link is still to be discovered. The progress of anthro- pology, instead of giving us any hope of finding it some day, authorizes us more and more to doubt its existence. Some anthropologists very favorable to the Darwinian theory readily acknowledge this. " In 1869," says one of them, " it appeared that nothing could be easier than to prove the descent of man from an ape or from some other mammifer. We have been forced to lessen our hopes a good deal, and at the present hour we do not see even the possibility of ever es- tablishing the descent of the races from one another. As to the precursor of man, he is an hypothesis more than ever; and we know now that the men of the prehis- toric ages no more resembled the apes than the present races." (Leon Laloy, in the ^^ Antkropologie^' August, 1890.)

    Logic, would require, perhaps, to re- nounce forever the Darwinian theory; but then it would be necessary to bow down before the fact of creation, and this con- cession is repugnant to modern rationalism. But, at least, let them not impose upon us in the name of science a theory which science condemns !

    It is not only paleontology that is op- posed to the evolutionary system as applied to our species, but the principle itself of the Darwinian evolution. An intimate friend of Darwin, Mr. Wallace has ac- knowledged this. "Of itself alone," he says, " natural selection, which is the basis of this system, is unable to explain the animal origin of man." And he proves this. Undoubtedly, selection, explains the development and preservation of charac- teristics having an immediate and personal usefulness ; but all the changes which man has experienced in the Darwinian hy- pothesis, in order to pass from the simian state to the present state, were not of this nature. Some of them were useless or even harmful. What advantage had, for instance, the anthropopithecus that gave rise to man in ridding himself of the shaggy integument that covered him? " Fur protects the individual against rain and cold. ... It would have been very useful for the savage to be protected in this way. This is so true that the most degraded peoples have invented some kind of garment to cover themselves. . . . Therefore, natural selection has not pro-

    duced the nakedness of the body of man." {Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection.)

    We can say the same, after Wallace, of the hand and larynx, which in the savage present a perfection that is not in harmony with the conclusion Darwin draws, and hence cannot be explained by natural se- lection. So in regard to the transforma- tion of the hind-hand of the ape into a foot. This transformation is far from being a progress. It would have been very useful to the savage to have kept this hind-hand, whose disappearance it is very difficult to explain by natural selection.

    In order to give an account of the acqui- sition of the characteristics of this nature, Mr. Wallace is obliged to have recourse to an artificial selection, whose agent would have been a " superior being," of which he does not give a clear explanation, but which would have " guided the march of the human species in a definite direction and for a special end, just as man guides that of many animal and vegetable forms." Mr. Wallace hereby acknowledges with de Quatrefages that it is impossible to explain the appearance of our species "without going outside of the exclusively scientific domain, that is to say, in adher- ing to what experiment and observation teach." Under such circumstances, is it not best to return to the traditional belief based upon the Biblical account of the creation .?

    II. Social State of the First Man. — Science does not prove that man sprang from a lower being. It does not even prove, whatever the evolutionary school may say, that the first men were savages. In support of its assertion this school pleads: i. The rudeness of the primitive implements. 2. The more or less simian conformation of some human skeletons regarded as the most ancient. Let us fol- low it on this double ground.

    I. Rudeness of the Primitive Ijnple- ments. — It is very true that the imple- ments of the first inhabitants of Western Europe, the only ones of which there is question here, were far from being like ours. Their tools in use were exclusively of stone, bone, or wood. No metal was known at that time and none was em- ployed.

    What we may question is that this stone age forcibly supposes an absolute state of savagery. The absence of metals is not incompatible with a certain degree of civi-




    lization. Ethnography offers more than one example of a similar association. It shows us among certain peoples, whose industry is the most rudimentary, rela- tively elevated moral and religious ideas. No people is, perhaps, more remarkable in this respect than the Mincopies, those ^vage inhabitants of the Andaman is- lands. Nothing could be more rudimen- tary than their industry, which is reduced, saj's Quatrefages, to the exclusive use of wood, shells gathered on the seashore, and stone split in the fire. They are in- finitely more barbarous from this point of view than the inhabitants of France in the Quaternary epoch, they do not know how- to cut stone nor to kindle the fire when once extinguished. And nevertheless they have a religion, some principles of mo- rality and traditional knowledge that raise them far above the most savage or bar- barous people. Far from living in a state of wholly bestial promiscuousness, as has been alleged, they are monogamists and severely moral. As to their belief in re- gard to a future life and to the origin of the world and of man, it comes surpris- ingly near to the Christian doctrine in this respect. We can say the same of the Negritos of the peninsula of Malacca. They also know how to unite an industry of the rudest character with a knowledge that prevents us from confounding their state with real savagery.

    If it is thus with these populations taken, it seems, at the lowest degree of the social ladder, with much more reason may we be- lieve that the barbarity of our predecessors in the Quaternary epoch was neither so profound nor so abject as some would have us believe. Their industry was, indeed, far superior to that of the Mincopies. At least they knew how to work the stone, and work it with such a skill that we could hardly do as well as they did, even with the help of our metal instruments. From a lump of flint or quartz they formed an ax, a knife, a saw, a scraper, a lance point, or an arrow. With a bone they made har- poons, barbed arrows, bodkins, even nee- dles ; which proves that man used garments at that time. His industry extended still further. According to need he became an artist, and a talented one at that. He has left to us in different localities of Europe, manifest proofs of his skill as an engraver and sculptor. He knew how to represent with great precision most of the animals that surrounded him. Some of these pic-

    tures reveal a talent for imitation of which many an artist in our day would be proud. Certainly there is nothing in all this that denotes great barbarity.

    It is true, they tell us, that this perfec- tioned work dates only from the late Qua- ternary epoch, and that we must not confound it with the very rude industry of the early Quaternary age. To this we answer that the oval or almond-shaped axes of the earlier epoch are already superior to the stone implements in use among cer- tain savage populations, such as the Minco- pies. Moreover, they ^\nll not succeed in convincing us that the man who manufac- tured them was reduced to this sole imple- ment, if implement it was ; for we are still ignorant to what use they were devoted, and ethnography points out nothing similar in the tools of the savages of our day. If they exist alone or almost alone in certain layers, it is undoubtedly because they were the object of a special manufacture ; but nothing prevents us from believing that in the same epoch, in a neighboring locality, they worked stone in a different manner. We are even forced to admit this contem- poraneousness, at least for some of the various types in the Quaternary time, if we do not wish to be forced to the impos- sible consequence of admitting that man had hardly more than one instrument at his disposition : first the ax, then the scraper, the arrow, and finally the knife. Just as if he had to pass through three long periods before discovering that a blade of flint could be used for a cutting instru- ment !

    It is best, then, to consider all the products of human industry in the Qua- ternary time as about contemporaneous. Now, viewed thus as a whole, these imple- ments leave far behind those of the most of the savages of our time. From this we have to conclude that man in this epoch was superior to them morally and socially. The very fact that this man progressed, that he triumphed in his struggle against the animals that surrounded him, that he developed his tools and his industry, alone proves that he was not an absolute savage. Even E. Renan admits this, and all his- tory attests that no people have by them- selves succeeded in developing from a savage state. We may say that the primi- tive man was a barbarian, but we may not call him a savage.

    After all, we cannot judge of the state of the really primitive man from that of




    man in the Quaternary epoch in Western Europe, for this would be going against all traditions and probabilities, even against the deductions of linguistics, eth- nography, and the natural sciences, by pretending that mankind took its rise in Europe. It cannot be questioned that mankind comes from Asia. If, therefore, we wish to judge of man's social state, his nature, and his industry in the times that immediately followed his appearance, it is thither we must go to study him. Now, to our knowledge it happened only once that there was established on Asiatic soil the clearly marked superposition of differ- ent industries-, this was at Hissarlik, on the supposed site of ancient Troy. Schlie- mann, the author of the famous excava- tions, tells us that he found superposed ruins of seven distinct civilizations. Now, far from there being progress from the bottom to the top, just the contrary took place, at least starting from the second layer. This discovery, to which the evo- lutionists affected to close their eyes, is nevertheless one of the most significant. It alone gives us a truer idea of the gen- eral march of civilization than all the dis- coveries that have been made in the West, not only because it shows more superposed industries, but also because being nearer to the cradle of mankind, it necessarily dips deeper into the past, and traces the customs of a people that we can properly consider as primitive, on account of their proximity to the place which saw the first appearance of our species.

    2. Nature of the Human Fossils. — The rudeness of the implements in the Quaternary time does not, therefore, prove that the first man was a mere savage, and much less that he had an animal origin, as the Darwinian school would have us be- lieve. Does the nature of the fossil human remains prove this any more clearly .?

    The number of human bones that merit the name oi fossils, — that is, those which go back at least to the Quaternary time, — is far from being so considerable as was claimed at the beginning of the pre- historic studies Even those who claim that man, or rather his precursor, comes down from the Tertiary epoch, acknowl- edge that they have not yet discovered any human remains dating back authentically to this epoch. This, however, did not hinder them from describing minutely and dividing into distinct species that Tertiary ancestor whom they have deco-

    rated with the name Anthrofopithecus. For those who, like ourselves, keep strictly to the facts, there can be question only of a Quaternary man.

    We could quote at least forty localities where they discovered human skeletons, or fragments thereof, apparently going back to the Quaternary time. Unfortu- nately, the most of these human remains had, in the eyes of the evolutionists, the defect of too much resemblance to the present man. For this reason, M. de Mortillet has thrown out three-fourths of them. He retained only nine, natu- rally those which had the desired forms and tended to confirm the animal origin of man . The pieces on which he has be- stowed this honor comprise six skulls, two jawbones, and nearly an entire skeleton. The skulls were found at Cannstatt,(Wurt- temberg), at Neanderthal (Rhenish Prus- sia), at Eguisheim (Alsace), at Brux (Bohemia), at Denise (France), and in the trench of Olmo (Italy) ; the jawbones, in the grottos of Naulette (Belgium), and at Arcy-sur-Cure (France) ; finally the skele- ton, at Laugerie- Basse (France). Let us throw a glance on each of these precious remains and consider both their authen* ticity and form.

    The skull of Cannstatt, the oldest col- lected, because its discovery goes back to the year 1700, was found in the locality of this name, near Stuttgart, together, they tell us, with bones of the elephant, bear, and hyena. The evolutionists, who ap- plauded it on account of its passably rude form, are obliged to acknowledge that there are serious doubts as to its authen- ticity. " It is now believed at Stuttgart," writes an admirer of de Mortillet, Ph. Salmon, " that it was not in the bosom of the Quaternary grounds, but among the rubbish of the clilT with some pottery that it was discovered." Now it is an estab- lished fact, in prehistoric matters, that pottery was yet unknown in the Quater- nary epoch. The result is that we must discard the skull of Cannstatt, because it is agreed that we must take into consider- ation only those whose authenticity is un- questioned. M. de Mortillet was not far from acknowledging this when, in opposi- tion to M. de Quatrefages, he refused to make it the type of the primitive race, and reserved this honor to the skull of Nean- derthal.

    Does the Quaternary origin of the latter offer a greater guarantee ? We are at lib-




    erty to doubt this. It was found in 1856, near Diisseldorf, in a clayey alluvion which, they tell us, has furnished some re- mains of Quaternary species. It is possible; but it is well to add that they have also found polished stones in the same alluvion ; something which tends to refer it to the present period. Moreover, nothing proves that we have not to do with an ordinary tomb. The corpse, to which the skull be- longed, was lying, regularly stretched out, only two feet deep, like that of a buried person. Now, if there is question of a burial, the association with fossil species proves nothing. Even to-day we some- times bury our dead in grounds rich in fossils of different geological periods. Shall the future inquirer, who establishes this association, be authorized to deduce therefrom the contemporaneity of man and the animal species, the debris of which ac- company his own?

    Hence, we might refuse to accept the skull of Neanderthal as well as that of Cannstatt. But suppose we acknowledge its authenticity. What must we conclude from this.? It is true that the forehead is straight, the cranial cavity elliptic and very long, the bones quite thick, and the super- ciliary arches remarkably prominent ; but there is nothing to prove that this skull is not pathological, as was believed at the beginning. If to-day it is considered nor- mal, it is because there have been found the same characteristics in different his- torical personages and in a certain number of our contemporaries whose intelligence is at least equal to the average. In its ca- pacity, the skull of Neanderthal is superior to the skulls of the Australians, and at- tains almost the average of female skulls. Whatever its age may be, the skull of Ne- anderthal has nothing simian, and the evolutionary school has to look somewhere else for the missing link which it claims exists between man and beast.

    We shall pass rapidly over the skulls of Eguisheim, Brux, Denise, and Olmo. They disclose nearly the same character- istics as the preceding, and their authen- ticity is almost always open to discussion. The first was found, it is true, in a clayey alluvion, which appears to be Quaternary. However, they have discovered in this same clay, and at a considerable depth, three corpses, of which one at least must have been buried ; for it carried on the breast a vase covered with a stone, and near it were found other vases of the same

    kind, as well as an ax of polished stone. The burial, pottery, and polished stone are, according to the teaching of the school, so many indications of the present period. Undoubtedly, it will be claimed that the presence of these objects' at the same depth is due to a disturbance of the ground; but why do they exclude the skull of Eguisheim from this interference.?

    The same uncertainty exists in regard to the skull of Brux. The report which made it known to us, and which dates only from 1872, expressly states that, in the alluvion where it lay, there was found an ax of polished stone. As they do not note any other Quaternary species in this layer, we are permitted to call in question the date they have assigned to it.

    The skull and other human bones dis- covered since 1844 in a volcanic tufa, near Puy, are probably less ancient than the preceding. Nobody believes to-day, as they did formerly, that they are contem- porary with the mastodon. The volcanic tufa in which they were incased, so to say, is evidently very recent, because it sur- mounts Quaternary alluvions. They may be even posterior to the formation of the tufa, and, consequently, may be due to tlie last volcanic eruptions of the Denise. Two competent geologists, Herbert and Lartet, who visited the locality in 1857, believed they could recognize therein the traces of a tomb. Whatever their nature may be, these bones cannot give us any useful in- formation about the question of man's origin.

    There remains the skull found in 1863, in the trench of Olmo, near Arezzo, Italy. This time the authenticity cannot be ques- tioned, for it was found at a depth of 150 feet, and in the ' neighborhood of bones with animal characteristics of the Qiiater- nary times. We have less reason to con- test it, because, according to de Mortillet, this skull has none of the simian features which he attributes to the primitive man. The form is elongated, it is true, but this form, the dolicJiocephalous, agrees very well with a developed intelligence.

    Are the simian characteristics, so ar- dently sought for by the evolutionists, found any better in the jawbone, discov- ered in 1865, in the cave of Naulette, Bel- gium.? This was the belief for quite a while, but it is no longer so. The jaw- bone found in 1859, in the grotto or Arcy- sur-Cure, France, cannot detain us; for, according to the avowal of de Mortillet,




    the simian characteristics hardly reveal themselves. The chief of the prehistoric school, also refers it to the last part or the Quaternary epoch. The last piece which de Mortillet attributes to the Quaternary times, is a skeleton discovered in 1872, near Laugerie-Basse, on the banks of the Vezere. This time de Mortillet is prudent enough not to draw any conclusion in re- gard to the primitive man, and he is right, for the skull has been completely crushed by the fall of a rock, and it is impossible to construct its form.

    We have exhausted the list of fossil hu- man bones, acknowledged as such by the chief representative of prehistoric science. From the rapid examination we have made it follows that the authenticity of the most of them is debatable ; in none of them do we find the simian features predominating. The skulls of to-day do not indicate more perfect beings than those of the Quater- nary times. The adherents of the animal origin of our species will have to stop ap- pealing to human paleontology in support of their system. " The Quaternary man," says Quatrefages, " has always been man in the full sense of the word."

    III. Age of Man According to Pre- historic Archeology. — "Man ap- peared in Europe at the beginning of the Quaternary age, that is, at least 230,000 to 240,000 years ago." That is what we read in a book written by M. de Mortillett, one of the chiefs and founders of prehistoric science. So we see that we are far from the Biblical chronology. Elastic as this chronology may be, and liberal as we may be in its interpretation, we cannot stretch it to this measure. M. de Mortillet is only logical when he laughs at those who continue " to teach religiously that Adam was the first man." If our species goes back as far as he affirms, we have to ac- knowledge that the Bible is in error. The person whom it presents to us as the father of mankind can be at most only the father of the Jewish people, who in his pride made himself, they say, the father of the entire human race.

    Happily the chronological calculations of de Mortillet do not command our as- sent. Even many of his adherents do not accept them as serious. The most author- itative scholars of prehistoric science do not hesitate to acknowledge that it is impossi- ble to determine with any exactness the date of the appearance of man. They are not less in agreement as to the insuffi-

    ciency of the traditional chronology, in view of the discoveries recently made in the domain of natural sciences.

    We are of quite a different opinion. If there were any reason to set back for some thousand years the date of the creation of man, it would be» history that would oblige us to do so, and not geology nor prehistoric archaeology. Egyptian chro- nology, uncertain as it may be in its begin- ning, take us back to three or four thou- sand years before our era, that is, to a date anterior to that which most of the calcula- tions based upon the Bible attribute to the Deluge. Therefore, unless we accept the Egyptian people from the diluvian cata- clysm, as has been proposed, and place before the Deluge the first pharaonic dy- nasties, which is hardly admissible, we must necessarily increase the interval com- prised between Noah and Abraham. What- ever may be said of it, neither geology nor prehistoric archaeology has any such need. Let us briefly show this.

    We know that the geologists have di- vided the history of the globe into four great epochs, of very unequal durations, which they have called, according to their order : Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary. Their duration, impossible to figure in number of years, diminishes very rapidly from the first to the last. It is from this point of view that the Quater- nary period hardly merits to enter into comparison with the preceding ones, so short has it been. It is mostly in France that they have ranked it as one of the great geological epochs. The English have made of it a kind of supplement to the Pliocene period, the third part of the Tertiary epoch, and consequently have called it Certainly this term better indicates its real place in the his- tory of the globe than the word Quater- nary.

    In which of these epochs did man ap- pear? Everybody admits that it was neither in the Primary nor the Secondary epoch ; thereby recognizing already the recent date of his advent, seeing that these two epochs together constitute, perhaps, nine-tenths of the geological times. The doubt begins in the Tertiary epoch. Some geologists, endowed with a lively imagi- nation, have pretended to discover in the Miocene strata, which represent the mid- dle part of this epoch, artificially cut flints. The Abb6 Bourgeois set the ball rolling by labeling the many flints he had




    found in Thenay as the workmanship of the Tertiary man. At first he succeeded in enlisting several men of science on his side ; but the matter, on investigation, be- came so thickly enveloped in the mists of doubt that it vanished at last in utter im- probability. The reputed works of art, with indented surfaces, are more likely shapeless works of nature. Again, other flints, lances, arrowheads, spears, and the like, found in St. Prest, probably belong to a later formation. To determine the age of objects found in mud or- sand de- posits is most difficult, as they may easily have been buried subsequently at a greater depth. In like manner man's handiwork in conjunction with natural causes may have shifted the deposit. Moreover no standard is at hand for gauging the time of the deposits in the several periods. Recent researches, even in the much lauded Somme valley, have shown that the layers of sand were formed in historic times. Furthermore, it was alleged that droTving-s, which none but the hand of man could execute, adorned the bones of some Tertiary animals. Bones, too, had been produced which had been fractured, so it was said, by the hand of man. Col- ored impressions were also said to be distinctly perceptible on the bones of a petrified Hipparion recently discovered in Greece. How transparently thin these reasons are, he who runs may read. On investigation, it turns out that the holes and indentures were made by contem- porary' anin^als. Many of the alleged marks and drawings are accidental chinks wrought by mechanical causes.

    The Tertiary man being thus out of question, there remains the Quaternary man. The existence of the latter cannot be questioned. To say that man has lived in the Quaternary epoch is simply to ad- mit that he has been the contemporary of certain animal species characteristic to this epoch, such as the mammoth {Elepbas frimi^renius), the woolly rhinoceros {Rb. tichorrhinus), the cave bears, the Irish stag, and even the reindeer ( Cerz'us taran- dus), which we find no longer except in the Arctic regions, but which at that time lived in the temperate zone. Now, remains of these animals have been found so often, either together with human bones, or with the rude products of the industry of the primitive inhabitants, that the contempo- raneity of both can no longer be ques- tioned. The fossil man, on which ortho-

    dox writers made war for a long time, is therefore a reality. The Quaternary epoch having been ranked, rightly or wrongly, among the geological times, all the or- ganic remains which belong to it deserve to be termed fossils, and those of man form no exception to this law.

    Only, let us hasten to say it, to admit that man exists in the fossil state — in other words, that he lived in the Quater- nary epoch — does not mean, according to our view, that we have to leave the confines of traditional chronology. Indeed, every- thing goes to show that the animals which characterize the Quaternary epoch have lived, at least in some localities, until a * very recent date, approaching that of the Christian era. Remains of the mammoth have been found in European countries in quite recent formations, for instance, in peat-moors, which are usually referred to the present time. This animal has been found in Siberia in such a state of preser- vation that the dogs ate its flesh. The elephant, mammoth, or otter, still existed in the north of Africa and in the region of Ninive in historic times, and Parthenopex of Blois maintains that the latter animal could be found among the beasts which formerly inhabited the forests of Gaul. Caesar describes the reindeer as having lived, in his time, in the Hercynian forest, — that is, on the shores of the Rhine.

    It is an error to believe that the Quater- nary fauna was much different from ours. In fact,, it comprised all the savage animals that surround us, together with some spe- cies that had to emigrate on account of climatic changes, or fell under the strokes of the hunter, or succumbed in the strug- gle for life.

    Thus we see that, if we are to judge by the animals that characterize it, the Quater- nary epoch must have lasted nearly until the Christian era.

    It is true that it has some other charac- teristics, derived from climatology. Who says Quaternary' epoch says Glacial epoch, these two epochs having certainly coin- cided, at least in part. At that time, in- deed, the glaciers were considerable in extent, and the water courses more abun- dant than in our day: a double phenome- non which might have been due to the same cause, the melting of the ice each summer occasioning immense inundations, traces of which still exist. But, to recover something of these phenomena, it is not necessary to go back so far in the past as




    one might believe. History permits us to have quite clear glimpses thereof. Only fifteen or twenty centuries ago the winters were a good deal colder than they are at present. Herodotus describes the climate of Scythia in terms which would aptly re- fer to-day to Lapland and Greenland. He shows us this country completely frozen during eight months of the year, and the Black Sea frozen to such a degree as to carry the heaviest wagonloads. Aristotle and others after him tell us that it was so cold in Gaul that the ass could not live there. The Latin writers insist on their part on the rigors of the Gaulish climate, which did not permit, they say, either the culture of the olive tree or that of the vine. Virgil shows us the Danube crossed by teams, and the inhabitants of these misera- ble countries retiring into caves, clothed with the skin of wild beasts. Ovid, who passed several years in the region of the Danube, shows us this river entirely frozen at its mouth, so that wagons heavily loaded could cross it. He adds that he saw wine frozen in the bottles, and that he crossed over the ice of the Black Sea. Afraid of being accused of exaggerating, he appeals to the testimony of two former governors of Moesia, who could also establish these facts.

    Italy itself did not have at that time its present climate ; at least the Latin writers speak of it in terms that would not be true of it in our day. They speak of heaped- up snow, of rivers filled with floating ice, of hard winters that split stone and stopped the course of rivers, and this in the warm- est region of Italy, at the foot of the bul- warks of Tarentum. Such a picture could be applied to-day, at most, only to Central Europe.

    We have the same testimony in regard to the abundance of the water courses. Here geology joins its voice with that of history in attesting that most of the rivers had, 1,500 or 2,000 years ago, a much larger volume of water than they have at present. Michael Rossi has proved this of the Tiber; others have established the same fact for several rivers of Europe, of America, and Asia.

    Everything, then, goes to show, both fauna and climatology that the Quater- nary epoch is not so distant from our times. As to its duration we know nothing; but there is every reason to believe that it was not very considerable. However, we do not need to know it as far as regards the

    question that occupies us here; for, ac- cording to all appearances, man did not see the beginning of this epoch. He did not precede the glacial period, and was not even a contemporary of the great dominance of the glaciers. Hence his origin is comparatively recent.

    In support of the vast antiquity of the human race, they also appeal to tools, found sometimes at a considerable depth. These tools have been classified, to mark successive ages of long duration, into ages of rough and polished stone, of bronze, and of iron. The supposed evidence of deposits in caves, of river and other gravels, of fen-beds, etc., are pressed into service. But it staggers our faith in the whole chronological scheme to find, at the outset, that while Dr. James Geikie reckons the boulder clay in which old stone implements are found as marking 200,000 years, Croll, a no less eminent au- thority, sets it down as 980,000 years old. The age of human implements found un- der floors of stalagmite in caves, is, more- over, open to equal doubt, since observers differ greatly as to the rate of deposit at different times. For, while Mr. Pengelly tells us that it takes 5,000 years to create an inch of lime-dropping on the floors of Kent's Cavern in England, others assert that, elsewhere, it is formed at the rate of the third of an inch a year, which would give a foot in depth in little more than a century. A copper plate of the twelfth or thirteenth century, we are told, was found in a cave at Gibraltar, under eighteen inches of stalagmite. At Knaresboro. England, objects are incrusted with similar calcareous deposit so quickly that, as is well known, a trade in them is briskly kept up. In Italy the waters of the baths of San Felipe, have been known to deposit a solid mass of it, thirty feet thick, in twenty years. It is thus clear that the rate of deposit depends on circumstances. One condition of the surface may supply acids, from decaying vegetation, for ex- ample, which may dissolve the limestone much taster than another. It is not, there- fore, by any means certain that any given deposits, in a special case, imply even an approach to the extreme age demanded for them.

    The evidence deducted from river and other gravels and drifts is no less unsatisfac- tory. It is, indeed, quite impossible to fix their age either from their depth or their contents. Mr. Wood found the road




    leading to the Temple of Diana, at Ephe- sus, more than four yards below the pres- ent surface, and obtained remains of colossal sculptures, at the Temple itself, from the depth of six yards and a half. Local floods work great changes, and it is to be remembered that all rivers are much larger in a country still in a state of na- ture than when human settlement has in great measure drained oflf the surface waters. The shifting of river beds them- selves, work great changes. M. de Rossi thinks that the beds of drift, in the course of the Tiber, are not older than the Ro- man republic. M. Chabas, in a close examination of the tool-bearing drifts of Northern France, found that, at one part, bits of Roman pottery, at another, a cop- per coin of Charles VIII. of France, and at a third, pieces of yellow brick, were as deep in the soil as the stone axes, etc., and finally gave up the hope of fixing the age of anything by its position.

    The theory of widely separate ages for old and new stone tools, and for bronze and iron, is one of the scientific fancies which further investigation overthrows. To use the words of the Duke of Argyle , "There is no proof whatever that such ages ever existed in the world." Nations may all at a certain time have used stone tools, but the discovery of the metals must have been made much sooner at some places than at others. Thus, though flint implements have been found in abundance in South Africa, iron has been known from very ancient times over a large portion of that vast continent; iron ore, as Sir Sam- uel Baker informs us, being so common in Africa, and of a kind so easily reducible by heat, that its value might well be discovered by the rudest tribes. Stone, moreover, is rare in some countries, as, for example, in Mesopotamia, and hence it is not surpris- ing to find that stone implements of a very rude character coexisted there with ad- vanced civilization in agriculture and com- merce. Each "age," in fact, runs into the other, and tools of all the four kinds were used in not a few localities at the same time. So far from being indefinitely an- cient, the stone age, in all its characteristics, has prevailed during even the historic pe- riod. A well-made bronze pin was found in an excavation at the Isle of St. Jean, near Majon, in France, which till then had yielded only remains of the polished stone period, and M. Chabas found iron under similar circumstances elsewhere.

    In fine, of all the chronologies, that of which the Bible furnishes the elements is still the most authorized, and wherever we may look, we find nothing, absolutely noth- ing, in the natural sciences that clearly tends to discredit it. No more on this point than on others can the traditions taught in the text be given the lie.

    Manahem. — King of Israel, died in 761 B.C." Overthrew and killed the usurper Sellum, mounted the throne and reigned ten years in paying a tribute to Phul, king of Assyria. He left the throne to his son Phaceia.

    Manasses. — i. Jewish Patriarch, eldest son of Joseph, born in Egypt, was blessed by Jacob on his deathbed, and became the chief of one of the twelve tribes. This tribe, at the time of its leaving Egypt, counted 32,000 men capable of bearing arms; one- half remained beyond the Jordon, in the division of the Promised Land ; the other half obtained its possessions in the terri- tory of Samaria, Sichem, and Bethania. 2. Manasses (706-639 B. c). — King of Juda, died at Jerusalem. The son and impious successor of the good Ezechias. He began to reign when twelve years old. For his impiety and cruelties, God suffered him to be carried as prisoner to Babylon. Ma- nasses repented, did penance and was re- stored to his throne. He tried to repair the evil which he had caused, destroyed the temples of the idols, restored the worship of the true God and fortified Jeru- salem. We have, under the name of Ma- nasses, a prayer filled with sentiments of piety and penance which it is believed he composed during his captivity. He had for successor his son Amon.

    Mandaeans. See Sabeans.

    Manichaeanism is the Persian form of Gnosticism. Its author was Mani or Manes, who, according to traditian, was flayed alive, about the year 277, by order of King Veranes I. His doctrine was a combination of Parseeism and Gnosticism. It had nothing in common with Christian- ity, merely substituting Christian names for pagan ideas. Two eternal principles, Light and Darkness, with many Eons are constantly at war with each other. This is called the sj'stem of Dualism Man consists of two parts, mind ^nd matter, the latter is the seat of all evil. Christ, the son of Eternal Light, assumed a body cor- poreal only in appearance (Docetas), re-




    deemed man by instructing him to alienate himself from evil matter. His death on the Cross was an illusion. The "perfect" among the Manichaeans were obliged to abstain from animal food and intoxicating liquors ; the killing of animals was pro- hibited ; they were enjoined not to perform manual labor, and marriage was con- demned. The Mariichaeans boasted out- wardly of their asceticism and superior knowledge, but their private life belied their professions. They based their doc- trine on the revelations of Manes, the Paraclete, and on the Sacred Scriptures. Their distinguished adversary, St. Augus- tine tells them : " You, who believe of the Gospel what you please and reject what you please, rather believe yourself than the Gospel."

    Maniple. — An ornamental vestment worn by the priest upon his left arm at Mass. It is worn by deacons and subdea- cons, also. Originally, the maniple w^as a narrow strip of linen suspended from the left arm, which supplied the place of and was used as a handkerchief. About the eighth century it was enumerated among the sacerdotal vestments.

    Mankind {Unity of). — The unity of mankind, proceeding from a single pair, is, from the moral and dogmatic point of view, one of the most important truths which result from the account of the cre- ation of man. The dogma of original sin presupposes the community of origin of all men, and upon this community of origin human solidarity and frater- nity are founded. In our day, however, it finds a great number of adversaries, and we have to answer their objections. The advocates of a plurality of the human spe- cies, or the polygenists, have largely in- creased in both Europe and America of late years, and they strenuously oppose the doctrine of monogenism.

    I. Historic Glance at Polygenism. — The first polygenist whose opinions caused some notice was La Peyrere, a Frenchman. In his book Systeme theolo- giqiie fondS sur I ^ des Preadam- ites, published in 1655, the two principal ideas which he sets forth are, that Adam was not the first man, but only the father of the Jews, and that Moses is not the au- thor of the Pentateuch. According to him, chapter i. of Genesis relates the crea- tion of the Gentiles or pagans ; they were produced at the same time as the animals,

    and they appeared at the same time upon earth; these are the Preadamites. Chapter ii. of Genesis, on the contrary, makes known to us the origin of the people chosen by God to preserve the deposit of revelation. Adam is the first Jew and the father of this chosen people. Made from the slime of the earth, he received exist- ence only after the rest of the seventh day ; alone with Eve he inhabited the earthly Paradise ; he alone with Eve violated the prohibition which God had made as to the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil ; the other men, spread at that time over the globe, had no share in the sin of Adam.

    La Peyrere pretended to find the proof of this distinction of diverse species of men in the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and in certain facts related by Moses. St. Paul says that men have sinned : some, after the promulgation of the law, against the law ; others, before the law, against nature. His new interpreter concludes from this that there existed be- fore the men who were subject to the law, — that is, before the Jews, — other men of a different species. But the law of which the Apostle speaks is that of Moses, and in the time of Moses there existed already upon earth numerous nations, descended like the Jews from Noe and for whom the legislation of Sinai had not been made. La Peyrere sought to establish, it is true, that the Preadamites were mentioned in the history of Cain, because the latter was afraid of being killed by those whom he might meet and who could only be men of non-Adamitic origin. He alleged also the existence of a city in this time, when the descendants of Adam, however, could not be numerous enough to form considerable agglomerations, and, finally, he pointed out the distinction between the sons of God and the daughters of men or of Adam, whose union produced the giants. Accord- ing to him, the sons of God were not of the race of Adam.

    Later on, La Peyrere retracted his errors, and his book remained unfinished ; but his arguments were taken up again in our time by the American polygenists, as we shall see further on. In the seventeenth century his system found no supporters, but things were to be different in the eighteenth. Voltaire, who collected in his writings all that preceding ages had imagined against our Sacred Books, did not fail to uphold that there exist diverse " species of men."




    "Only a blind man," he says, "is permit- ted to doubt that the Whites, Negroes, Albinos, Hottentots, Laplanders, Chinese, and Americans, are entirely diflFerent races." Soon the negation of the unity of the hu- man species became the fashion in the philosophic camp, and, despite the author- ity of the most of the naturalists, notwith- standing that Linnaeus and Buffon without hesitation pronounced themselves in favor of the old doctrine, the pleasantries of the patriarch of Ferney prevailed.

    Infidelity had favored polygenism in Europe; political causes contributed a good deal to increase the number of its adherents in America. One of the most celebrated defenders of this system, Mr. Nott, has himself related the following fact. In 1844, the secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Calhoun, had ex- hausted his arguments in answering the pressing notes which England, backed by France, addressed to him on the question of abolishing Negro slavery. He could imagine nothing better than to support himself upon the authority of American anthropologists, and he defended his gov- ernment in the name of their theories, ac- cording to which the black men are of another si>ecies than the white. The cabinet of Great Britain was nonplussed by this unlooked-for argumentation, and thereafter ceased its importunities.

    It is certain that several American scien- tists allowed themselves to be influenced by the more or less unconscious desire to justify slave-trading and slavery. The /nost celebrated among them are Morton, Nott, and Gliddon. These polygenists ex- pressly admitted the fixity of the species, and even supported themselves upon this fixity of the species to conclude from the actual existence of human varieties as to their primordial and original exist- ence. Since that time there has been a complete change in the system, and to-day we have to look for the polyg- enists among the ranks of the adherents of the changeableness of the species, among the materialists and atheists, the defenders of evolution without limit. In their opin- ion man has not been created as man ; he has become such by a series of transforma- tions, abrupt according to some, slow, according to the majority of them. The lower species perfected and gradually raised themselves to language and reason, to the status of the intelligent and perfect being. Thus nature has produced by

    divers means diverse human species. That which Scripture teaches about our origin is consequently irreconcilable with the accounts of the new science.

    However, if the adherents of the plu- rality of the human species have become quite numerous, those of the unity of man- kind are far from throwing away their arms and abandoning the battlefield. Not only among the Faithful, but also among the indifferent, and even among the free- thinkers, monogenism counts defenders not less enlightened than convinced, and recruits new adherents every day. Lyell and Huxley acknowledge in express terms that all men may descend from one single pair; Alexander von Humboldt formally declares himself for the unity of our spe- cies, so also the anatomist Owen and the learned Prichard. The labors of the learned Protestant, Quatrefages, in favor of the unity of the human species enjoy a uni- versal and well-merited reputation. The numberless proofs accumulated by this em- inent anthropologist, as well as by many other naturalists, establish in a peremptory and decisive manner that science is far from being in contradiction with Scripture, according to which all men belong to the same species. Now it remains for us to show this accord of science and faith ; but as the American polygenists, in order not to fall into contradiction with the Bible, have followed the errors of La Peyrere and pretended that monogenism is not a Christian dogma, before all we have to answer their objections and to rectify their false interpretation of the sacred text; then we will set forth the proofs of the unity of the human species.

    II. Genesis and the Preadamites. — The arguments alleged by some of the sci- entists of the United States to turn Gen- esis in favor of their opinion are summed up in the following passage : —

    " Why still hesitating whether to throw the Bible under the wheels of progress? Alreadv many sincere Christians confess that the moment has arrived for preparing the reconciliation of the doctrine of the polygenists with the sacred texts. They are disposed to admit that the narrative of Moses does not apply to the whole of man- kind, but only to the Adamites, to the race from which God's people sprang; that there could have been upon earth other men about whom the sacred writer did not need to busy himself ; that it is nowhere said that the sons of Adam contracted in-





    cestuous unions with their own sisters; that Cain, driven toward the Orient after his fratricide, was marked with a sign, so ' that whosoever found him should not kill him ' ; that aside from the race of the children of God there was a race of the chil- dren of men ; that the origin of the children of men is not specified ; that nothing au- thorizes us to consider them as the chil- dren of Adam , that these two races undoubtedly differed in their physical characteristics, because their union pro- duced mongrels designated under the name of giants, ' as if to indicate the physical and moral strength of the crossed races ' ; that finally these different antediluvian races could have survived the Deluge in the person of the three daughters-in-law of Noe." (J. Pye Smith, Relations Bet-ween the Holy Scripture and Geology, 3d ed.,

    PP- 398-400)

    Let us take up these several arguments one after another. In the first place, it is not true that Genesis speaks of different human species. When La Peyrere beheld in the man created in the first chapter a man different from the one whose history the second chapter relates more in detail, he falsely interpreted the original text, for the Hebrew text in both cases calls by the same name Adam, the rational creature gone forth from the divine hands. Mor- ton himself is obliged to agree that "the sacred writings, according to their literal and obvious sense, teach us that all the men descend from a single pair." {Cra- nia Americana, Introd., Philadelphia, 1839.) Moses, conformable to the uni- form and unchangeable plan which he fol- lowed in drawing up the first Book of the Pentateuch, sets forth in the account of the earthly Paradise the history of our first father, whose creation he had simply announced in the account of the general creation. Then he continues the history of the children of Adam, without trou- bling himself to fill up a certain number of breaks, because the things which he omit- ted are naturally understood and cannot cause any doubt in the minds of readers generally. Thus he supposed that it was useless to relate in express terms that', from the beginning, Adam and Eve had daughters as well as sons, and that the brothers had taken the sisters for wives ; everyone understands this without being told. Besides, the sacred writers gener- ally mention women only in a vague manner in their genealogies; they are expressly 29

    named only when the sequel of the narra- tive demands it for fear of being unintel- ligible. Moses had no reason to inform us in so many words that Cain and Abel married their own sisters ; this appears clearly from his account and everybody knew it. In reading Genesis simply and without partisan spirit, one cannot help acknowledging that Moses knew no other men than Adam and his posterity.

    But, they say, if there existed no other men than the Adamites, how could Cain, after having committed his fratricide, be afraid of being killed by those whom he would meet .? It is easy to answer that it was because he could not forget that men would become multiplied, and as remorse and a bad conscience render one suspicious and restless, what is there astonishing in the fact that he was afraid that his crime might be avenged by his own death, when the children of Adam would have become more numerous?

    Some have endeavored to enforce the ob- jection and to establish the existence of an- other race by what the Scripture tells us : "Cain built a city, and called the name thfereof by the name of his son Henoch" (Gen. iv. 17). We have shown in another place that we must not understand this word " city" in the sense in which we em- ploy it to-day.

    A last argument is drawn from the men- tion of " sons of God " and " daughters of men." "The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose" (Gen. vi. 2). Here, the polygenists claim, there is question of two different species of men. The daughters of men are called in the original text " daughters of Adam," that is, the posterity of Adam and Eve ; the sons of God belong to another race which has nothing in common with those whom we call without reason our first par- ents.

    Such is the objection. It is false, because the "sons of God" cannot be understood as non-Adamitic men. The descendants of Adam were the creatures of God and consequently the sons of God, as much as every other species of men which one might suppose, or, better still, they would have been more so, if several creations had existed, because God, distinguishing and separating them from all the others, wished to make of the posterity of Adam, in the person of the Jews, His chosen people. It is generally believed that the " sons of




    God " are the descendants of Seth, who had remained faithful to the Lord, while the "daughters of men" are Cainites, whose fathers were impious ; but, whatever may be the exact meaning of these expressions, it is enough for us to state that the inter- pretation of the polygenists is a manifest counter sense and consequently inaccepta- ble.

    All the arguments which they have tried to draw from Holy Scripture against the unity of the human species are, therefore, false and without value. St. Paul rendered correctly the meaning of Genesis, when he declared that all men who live upon earth descend from the same father (Acts xvii. 26). The doctrine of monogenism is truly a Biblical doctrine.

    Since it is thus, we have only now to es- tablish that Scripture in regard to this subject is not in disagreement with science, not in the sense that science can prove that all men descend from one pair, — this question is out of its domain, — but in the sense that it establishes that all men form only one species. The scientific ob- jection against monogenism is drawn from the differences which we remark among the human races. We will explain first the diversity in the races actually existing, and, second, we will establish the unity of mankind.

    III. Diversity in the Human Races. — I. General Observations. — The most popular argument in favor of polygenism, that which most strikes superficial minds and those little accustomed to reflection, is that drawn from the remarkable exterior differences which distinguish the diverse human races from one another. The ene- mies of the unity of our species also insist upon this point the most. The learned of our day have repeated only in other terms what Voltaire had said, that the Negro with his woolly hair and the white with his smooth hair cannot be of the same species.

    In the physical order there seems to be an abyss between one another. In the in- tellectual or moral order how different also is the intelligence of a native of Terra del Fuego from that of a Plato, a St. Augus- tine, or a St. Thomas.? And if in imagina- tion we assemble, from among the millions of men that at present people the earth, representatives of all the living languages and make each one express himself in his own language, or dialect, what a cacao- fhony'. What confusion! How can all these men who express themselves in such

    a different way descend from the same mother.? How could their fathers of old have called the same things by the same names? That is what strikes the crowd and impresses the groundlings.

    But nevertheless, when we look closer, when we reflect on what these differences and contrasts in reality are, we perceive very soon that we cannot draw from this any conclusion. Intermediary rings exist and form only one long chain. Between the Greek of Athens and the Esquimaux, there are a thousand gradations, which from the Hellenic type reach down to ugli- ness by a regular descent. From the ob- tuse mind of an inhabitant of Terra del Fuego to the intelligence of a Plato, there are equally numerous steps by which we mount gradually from the depths where degraded man possesses only some mate rial and gross ideas, up to those serene heights where flourishes the philosophy of the Academy and of the Angel of the School. And in the physical order, as in the intellectual, the transition is effected by means of an almost indefinite series of stages, degeneration, proceeding only through shades hardly perceptible from one another. In a word, the contrast no longer surprises, when one passes through all the intermediary degrees.

    2. Causes of the Diversity in the Human Races. — It cannot be denied, however, that there are differences existing among men. Just as the lightest blue and the darkest blue are distinct, in spite of the shades that unite them, so also there are distinct races in the human species, in spite of the ties of relationship that con- nect them. We are careful not to deny these real distinctions ; what we wish solely to establish is that these differences do not exclude the community of origin; that these varieties, these races, do not constitute diverse species ; that the polyg- enists are mistaken when they confound the races with the species and conclude from the diversity of the human races the plurality of the species. As to this some indispensable notions and definitions are subjoined.

    The species is a collection of individuals having the same essential characteristics, descending from the same primitive pair and enjoying the faculty of reproducing themselves indefinitely. A group of species having common characteristics is called genus or kind. The species is unchangeable in its essential characteristics, but its ac-





    cessory characteristics may become modi- fied and changed, under the influence of diverse causes, and then give rise to varie- ties and races. We call varieties the groups of individuals of the same species which are distinguished from the common type by accidental modifications. These modifications are not essential and specific, but changeable and unstable by their very nature, although, on account of peculiar circumstances, they may become fixed and lasting. In virtue of the natural law of reversion, the varieties return of them- selves to their original type, unless exter- nal causes, and particularly the union between individuals of the same variety, render these passing characteristics per- manent, conformably to the law of hered- ity, which transmits to the children the qualities peculiar to the parents. When the accessory characteristics which consti- tute a variety are fixed and perpetuated in a constant manner by a generation, they form a race.

    By applying to the human species these notions, universally admitted by all former naturalists, it will be easy to account for the phenomena which humanity now pre- sents. The solution of the problem is just this : All men who live upon earth form only one species, but this species comprises several particular races ; these races all have for their starting point some primitive varieties, produced accidentally or naturally through diverse causes, and whose characteristics have become heredi- tary. The varieties may have manifested themselves sometimes through the effect of a sudden change in some individuals ; generally they must have been the accum- ulated result of gradual modifications, brought on by the particular circum- stances in which the subjects found themselves placed, among whom these alterations from the original type were produced. The error of the polygenists consists, therefore, in confounding the races with the species and in pretending that the accessory characteristics which distinguish the races are specific charac- teristics. We shall show that these char- acteristics are not really specific, but have, or at least may have, an accidental origin. Now, to show that science is not in contradiction with Scripture on the fact of the unity of the human species, it is enough to establish that this unity is scientifically explainable and admissi- ble, and that anthropology is entirely una-

    ble to prove the plurality of the human species.

    That which establishes in a peremptory manner the possibility of an origin com- mon to all men, is that there exists in no race any distinctive characteristic which is not found exceptionally in some indi- viduals of another race. None of these characteristics is, therefore, really spe- cific, for, in the contrary case, we could find it only in the species to which it would properly belong. Since it appears accidentally in individuals of diverse races, it follows that it could also be pro- duced primitively in the same manner, and that it became common in certain fractions of humanity only in virtue of what we call the influence of surroundings and heredity. For the rest, to convince ourselves, we have only to study succes- sively the various characteristics of the races and to show, by the light of observa- tion and experience, that they are all acci- dental and not essential to the species; consequently, the fruit of circumstances, and not a quality without which it is im- possible to conceive an individual belong- ing to our species.

    It is so true that the characteristics of the races have nothing absolute, but are on the contrary very relative, we might al- most say arbitrary, that until now anthro- pologists could not come to an understand- ing in determining them, some adopting such a characteristic as sufficiently distinct, others rejecting it as subject to too many exceptions. Hence, in spite of the ac- cumulated labors of many learned investi- gators, they have not yet agreed on a classification of the races that is unani- mously or even generally accepted. Thus, there neither exists, nor can there exist, a really scientific classification of the human races. In other words, all the divisions that have been proposed are arbitrary, and no characteristic has been discovered that is exclusively peculiar to each race. Hence, they belong more or less to one another.

    However, it may be as to the races, it follows at least from what we have just seen, that the principal characteristics which distinguish men from one another are the diversity of organic conformation, color, hair, and language. These are characteristics which we have now to ex- amine, in order to establish whether they are really original or whether they are simply accidental deviations from the




    primitive form, having become stable in the course of time.

    By examining these characteristics one after another, we siiall see that they can originate from the influence of surround- ings, and from that of heredity. By "surroundings" we understand the cli- mate, nourishment, mode of life, customs^ civilization, in a word all that pertains to the place and time in which one lives and which may exercise a certain influ- ence on the physical, intellectual, or moral development of the individual. The in- fluence of surroundings is indisputable in natural history. A vast number of per- fectly established facts furnish the proof.

    Vegetables become white when sheltered from light, and the effect is not superficial, but extends even to the fibers of the plant, to its taste, and to other succiferous quali- ties. The animals of the polar regions become white at the approach of winter. The Swiss ox becomes, in two generations, on the plain of Lombardy, a Lombard ox. Two generations also suffice to change the bees of Bourgogne, which are small and brown, into bees of Brescia, which are large and yellow, when raised in the latter district. In the warm regions of South America, European cattle have by degrees lost their hair. The dahlia, sent from Mexico to the botanical garden of Madrid, produced there in 1791 a flower which had nothing remarkable about it. It was cultivated, not as an ornamental plant, but because it was believed to be a succedaneum of the potato. However, the surround- ings into which it had been transported finished by transforming it entirely. In 1810, some flowers of seedlings attracted attention and florists commenced to culti- vate it with care. In 1834, they had ob- tained the varieties which to-day make the dahlia one of the principal ornaments of our flower gardens. Dogs in particu- lar, offer us a striking example of the changes produced by environment. The following example is related : —

    "A man went to live under the polar cir- cle ; his dog followed him and clothed him- self with the thick fur of the spitz ; the man, with his companion, passed to the inter- tropical regions, and the dog lost all his hair. And it was not merely the exterior that underwent a change, but the skeleton was affected, together with the bony head, like the rest. Who would confound the skull of a bulldog with that of a greyhound ? ' ' See art. Racks, in Dictionn. encycloped.

    The influence of civilization and environ- ment upon man himself is established by a number of facts. The sedentary Arabians of Hauran are of high stature and adorned with a very strong beard, while their no- madic brethren, the Bedouins, exposed to all the vicissitudes of an unstable life, are small and have hardly any beard. To make amends, they have a more piercing look. For the rest, the difference commences to be perceptible only at the age of sixteen years. They have remarked at Morocco the same difference between the Arabs who dwell in cities and those who live under the tent. In many countries, there have been established notably different charac- teristics among the noble families and the common people. The Arabs of the North compare the nobility to the palm-tree, and the people to the brier. If a different man- ner of living produces differences in the same country, with much more reason does the complete change of environment carry with it considerable modifications.

    The Frenchman, transported into Can- ada not many generations back, has seen the change of his complexion, physiog- nomy, and hair. In the United States, in the same lapse of time, the Anglo-Saxon has given rise to the Tankee race, which differs from the mother-stock in certain ex- terior characteristics. Since the first Creole generation, this same English type has be- come so modified in New Zealand, as well as in Australia, that the eye distinguishes at once " the persons of the old soil," from " the children of the new soil."

    The influence of environment on the or- ganic constitution is therefore certain and incontestable. Heredity is another factor which is sufficient in itself to explain a por- tion of the phenomena that we are study- ing. It is the peculiarity of living beings to repeat or to reproduce themselves with the same forms and attributes. A white man transported into warm countries, takes such a dark shade that he might be mis- taken for a black man.; however, his son is born white and keeps himself thus, as long as he is not subject to the same atmospheric conditions. The intellectual qualities trans- mit themselves as well as the physical char- acteristics ; in the family of Bach, there were thirty-two musicians.

    An accidental quality, a variety produc- ing itself spontaneously without any known cause, may transmit itself through heredity and thus constitute a race. In 1790 there appeared in Paraguay a bull without horns.




    At the end of a few years this breed had covered entire provinces. Cases of pecul- iar characteristics produced spontaneously and transmitted by heredity abound, and this law of transmission is universally ad- mitted by naturalists.

    The influence of heredity and that of environment may unite and combine them- selves so as to tend toward the same end and thus render more stable the character- istics which differentiate the races. The environment insensibly brings on more or less considerable changes; heredity fixes and perpetuates them, so that the modifi- cations due to climate, or mode of life, for instance, may still continue to exist, and transmit themselves in a certain measure, even under another climate and with other habits and different civilization. Finally, the crossing or mixture of races produces new modifications, intermediary or sub- races, capable of perpetuating themselves with their new characteristics, when the circumstances are favorable.

    With the help of these certain and indis- putable principles, all the differences that distinguish the human races from one an- other, explain themselves without diffi- culty, and in a satisfactory manner, as we shall show. Let us begin by accounting for the diversity of color.

    3. Color in the Races. — The color of the skin is no specific sign. Darwin him- self acknowledges that nothing is more uncertain, or, according to his expression, " more floating than color." It is such an accessory quality that we can find its whole series in a single animal. Among the col- ored people themselves, black is so little essential that "at the moment of birth, the Negroes are not black; they become so only through contact with the atmospheric air," says Pruner-Bey. Besides, the cause of this phenomenon is well known to-day. Color is caused by the carbon pigment found in the Malpighian cells. These cells are also found in the colored places of the white man's skin. The sun cannot sud- denly effect this transformation, but it may further it in the course of time. A change in the color of the skin may have easily been caused b}' the sun acting in conjunction with moisture, temperature, manner of living, and other climatic fac- tors. The physiological explanation is that respiration, being retarded by heat, fails to change all the carbon into carbonic acid. The light playing on the surface materially aids the process. Parts not ex-

    posed, like the sole of the foot and the palm of the handj are less dark even in the Negro. Arabian women, who go about well wrapped up, are as white as Europeans. Even in the same country and climate this influence acts in different degrees, al- though the skins are generally darkest in hot countries. Anyhow, side by side with secondary and accidental causes, light and climate will always be regarded as the chief factors in producing the change. The experience gained in America during three hundred years has shown that the color and facial expression of Negroes are undergoing a slow change, especially when they are brought into Northern countries.

    4. The Hair in the Human Races. — With the characteristic trait of the color of the skin in the human races is intimately connected that of the color and nature of the hair, for there is almost always a cor- relation between them. Thus, the black always have black hair.

    Some anthropologists of our day attach great importance to the hair conditions of man. Even some polygenists have at- tempted to make it the basis of a differen- tiation of the human species. But, in spite of the differences in color and form, the hair is essentially the same among all men, and the change from one variety tx> another is effected only by insensible gradations. The so-called woolly hair of the Negro is such only in appearance. Age and climate have an admitted influence on the hair. We know that the color of the hair changes with age. Often from a light color at the time of birth, it gradually takes on a darker shade, and finally becomes white in old age. *' The hair of the newborn Negro is generally more of a chestnut color than black; it is straight and slightly curled at the end," says Pruner-Bey, that is to say, it then resembles, just as in the color of the skin, that of the European. Generally the Negro becomes gray quite early.

    The hair in the human races is, there- fore, only of secondary importance, and does not establish in any manner their di- versity of origin.

    5. Forms of the Skull. — Differences in the human races, for instance, in the skele- ton and in the formation of the skull, are also of little importance. Occupation and manner of living, and malformations, in- tentional or otherwise, may have had their share in producing a clear but variable type in a short time. Such deviations, however, in the animal world do not hin-




    der the various races from forming one species. In man the difficulty is even less. For as the races are generally fertile, in- termediate forms are possible everywhere, and these act as links and transmission agents. Blumenbach has pointed out that transitional forms grow more and more numerous. Humboldt considers that the many intermediate stages in skull forma- tion and in the color of the skin are a strong plea for unity. The transition of races is made still clearer by modern re- searches. The American stock is the con- necting link between the Caucasian and the Mongolian ; the Malay bridges over the Caucasian and the Negro. The differ- ence between the highest and lowest types may well be greater than that between the lowest human and the highest animal type ; but, as in the species of animals, the intermediaries equalize the difference and leave the human type unaffected. The orang-outang is brown like the Malay ; the gorilla and the chimpanzee are black like the Negro. But neither all Malays nor all Negroes have the same intense coloring. Similar climatic influences may have been at work to produce similar results in both man and ape. Whether the orang-outang has a round skull like the Malay, and whether the chimpanzee's skull is elon- gated like that of the Negro, are points still hotly debated by the learned ; in any case the identity would not be sufficient to establish descent.

    6. Higher and LoTver Races. — The dis- tinction between higher and lower races proves nothing against the unity of the human species. The Caucasian has no claim to the highest place ; for other races are equally complete, and equally adapted to their environment. The Negro can en- dure heat and cold and withstand fatigue better than the Caucasian and American. And in this respect the Malay, climate not- withstanding, is superior to the European. In intellect, however, the case is different. No one denies that the very lowest races are still human. But there is a wide- spread opinion that some races are, and have been, low, and will never rise. Dar- win could hardly belive that the inhabit- ants of Terra del Fuego were men. Similar stories are told of Australians and Polynesians, and in the case of Negroes have passed current as an axiom. Intel- lectual inferiority is regarded as a specific characteristic of the Negro race, especially of those stocks that are the typical repre-

    sentatives of the race. It is likewise pre- tended that the ape approximates man in the formation of the brain. With the physical differences, we have already dealt ; but speech and reason clearly demonstrate that the intellectual difference between the ape and the Negro is specific ; whereas, there is a difference of degree only between the Negro and other races. The intellec- tual inferiorit}' of the Negro and savage tribes has been grossly exaggerated. Even Darwin was subsequently obliged to recon- sider his verdict on the people of Terra del Fuego. Owing to the praiseworthy efforts of the missionaries, notable results have already been achieved. This proves that they possess a great capacity for edu- cation. The Indians often display great shrewdness and intelligence. Thanks to Jesuit influence, a new and able nation has sprung up in Paraguay, Colorado, and elsewhere. Negro children educated in America and Europe learn easily. All tribes are susceptible of education and culture ; all are possessed of a greater or less intelligence.

    7. The Plurality of the Languages. — The plurality of languages does not prove anything against the unity of mankind. Languages are, in fact, as numerous as in- dependent peoples, and history tells us that language and customs were the great barrier that separated tribe from tribe. Some people have, indeed, changed their language. One original language may not be an absolutely certain proof that the human race is one. Still language is a certain guide, and the o'riginal language is at least a negative proof, and affords a strong and positive presumption in favor of unity of mankind. Whence comes it that languages differ.? This question, though hardly ever broached formerly, seems now to be the subject of discussion. Outside the Old Testament there is scarcely a record of any nation occupying itself with the problem why languages are many, instead of one. The Indians of Central America have a legend, similar to the account of Scripture, that all men formerly had one speech and one religion, but that when the people of Tulan worshiped false gods, their speech was changed.

    " Though languages," says Humboldt, *' may at first sight appear very different, though their notions, humors, peculiari- ties, may seem singular, nevertheless, they betray a certain analogy, and we shall un-




    derstand their numerous relations better according as the philological history of nations and the study of language be- comes more perfect." The last twenty years have proven the correctness of this view to a great extent. The Mosaic ac- count represents nations as related whose relationship antiquity was unable to recog- nize. The Romans and Greeks, in spite of their culture, never dreamed that they were more nearly related to the Arians and Germans than were the Syrians and Tyrians. What Holy Writ has stated, the science of the nineteenth century has con- firmed : lonians, Arians, and Germans are of common origin. The study of lan- guage has proven that before the ancestors of the Hindoos and Persians emigrated toward the south, and before the Greek, Roman, Celtic, Teutonic, and Slav colo- nies went to Europe, there was probably on the plains of Asia a tribe of Arians who spoke a language which was not Sanskrit, nor Greek, nor German, but which called the Giver of light and life by the same name, which may to-day be heard in the temples of Benares, in the basilicas of Rome, and in the cathedrals and churches of Northern Germany, " All the Indo-Germanic languages," says Pott, "were identical before the separation; they exist in the germ of one original language, which disappeared when they were differentiated from it."

    In conclusion, we can hold that the Mosaic account, which tells us the di- vision of languages took place a long time after the creation, and brings this division into immediate connection with the di- vision of mankind into different nations, at the building of the Tower of Babel, ap- pears to be confirmed by the teachings of the science of language.

    Manna. — A concrete vegetable exuda- tion, a grain, in the Old Testament manna, described, as found by the Israelites, as a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. And when the chil- dren of Israel saw it, they said one to another: " Man-hu ! which signifieth : What is this ! for they knew not what it was" (Ex. xvi. 15), implying that the name thus arose from the question, Man-hu, {what is this?). Hence manna signifies the food by which the children of Israel were sustained in the wilderness (Ex. xvi. 14-36; Num. xi. 6, 7). The cir- cumstances attending the gift of manna

    show that it was miraculous. It fell every morning with the dew and in such quanti- ties, during forty years, as to supply Is- rael with a substitute for bread. It did not fall on the Sabbath, but a double quan- tity fell the day before, and when gathered remained fresh till the first day. It ceased when the people reached Galgala, but Moses laid up a golden vase of it near the Ark as a memorial. All these features prove that the manna was something supernatural.

    Manning (Henry Edward). — An English cardinal ; born in Totteridge, Hertfordshire, July 15th, 1808. After graduating as double first at Balliol Col- lege, Oxford, in 1830, he was appointed, in 1834, rector of Lavington and Graffam, in Sussex, and in 1840 he was made arch- deacon of Chichester. In 1851 he left the Church of England and joined the Roman Catholic Church. After studying for some years in Rome he was ordained priest in 1857, and founded the Congrega- tion of the Oblates of St. Charles Borro- meo, at Bayswater, London. On the death of Cardinal Wiseman, in 1865, he was appointed archbishop of Westminster. Being a zealous supporter of Papal In- fallibility, Dr. Manning was made a cardi- nal in 1875. He was the foremost spirit in all Catholic movements in England, or- ganized many parochial schools, built more than 200 churches or chapels, promoted temperance, started many be- nevolent societies among the poor, and took a lively interest in all practical re- forms. He wrote : The Grounds of Faith (1852) ; The Temporal Power of the Pope (1866) ; The True Story of the Vatican (1877-1888); The Catholic Church and Modern Society (1880) ; The Eternal Priesthood {i9Sj,); Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost; England and Christen- dom; and numerous volumes of sermons and letters on ecclesiastical topics. Died in London, Jan. 14th, 1892.

    Maranatha. See Anathema.

    Marcellina (St.). -^Christian widow, born at Rome. Of the illustrious family of the Marcellus, widow at the age of sixteen years ; in possession of immense wealth, she erected a cloister in her palace on Mount Aventin; turned her opulent apart- ments into cells and oratories, which she opened to widows and young ladies who desired to consecrate themselves to God. F. Jan. 31st.




    Marcellinus (St.). — Pope from 296 to 304. Roman bj birth, martyr under Dio- cletian. The story of the supposed fall of Marcellinus, that, in the time of persecu- tion he had ofTered incense to the idols and subsequently repented before a coun- cil of 300 bishops assembled at Sinuessa, between Rome and Capua, is by all learned men now universally rejected as false. The whole fabrication was stig- matized already by St. Augustine, as a Donatist calumny, and ascribed by him to Petilius, a Donatist bishop, who, without a shadow of proof, also accused the suc- cessors of Marcellinus, Marcellus, Melchi- ades, and Sylvester, of having delivered the Sacred Scriptures to the persecutors.

    Marcellus (name of two Popes). — Afarcelltts I. — Pope from 308 to 309. Successor of Marcellinus, suffered perse- cution under the tyrant Maxentius; was condemned to serve as groom in the imperial horse stables, and died in this slavery. Marcellus II. — Pope in 1555. Reigned only twenty-two days.

    Marcion and Marcionites. — Marcion, a Gnostic philosopher and heresiarch, of the second century. Originally a priest of Sinope in Pontus. He had distin- guished himself by his zeal and his ascet- ical life, but, falling into the crime of incontinence, he was excommunicated by his own father, the Bishop of Sinope. He came to Rome about the year 150, to ap- ply for readmission into the Church, but was rejected. Upon which he joined Cerdo, a Syrian Gnostic, who had come to Rome in the time of Pope Hyginus. Cerdo maintained that the God of the Old J^aw and the Prophets was not the Father of Jesus Christ. Adopting this heresy, Marcion, whom St. Polycarp had called " the firstborn of Satan," taught an abso- lute distinction between the God of the Christians and the God of the Jews, and asserted that the Church had lapsed into Judaism. He repudiated the Old Testa- ment entirely, and of the New Testament he retained only a mutilated copy of the Gospels of St. Luke and the ten Epistles of St. Paul. Marcion is said to have re- pented of his apostasy, but, if so, his rec- onciliation with the Church was precluded by his speedy death. The most noisy of his disciples were Mark and Apelles. The Marcionites were very numerous in Italy, Egypt, Palestine, Asia Minor, and even in Persia. The sect had a complete ecclesi-

    astical organization, with priests and bishops, and continued as late as the sixth century.

    Marechal (Ambrose) (1768- 1828). — American prelate; was born at Ingre, France, and came to America in 1792. He entered on his priestly career by mission- ary labors in St. Mary's county and on the Eastern shore of Maryland, but on the or- ganization of St. Mary's College in 1799 became professor of theology in that insti- tution. Archbishop of Baltimore in 1817. He encountered great opposition from lay trustees, who claimed the right to ap- point priests, and who wished to make the pastors of God's Church their hired servants.

    Marists. — Religious congregation, founded, at Marseilles, by Eugene of Mazenod (later bishop of this city; died in 1861). Established in 1815, the society was approved by Leo XH. in 1828. Its members devote themselves to the manage- ment of schools, instruction in industry, agriculture, etc. They have houses in Italy, England, North America, and other countries.

    Mark. — Greek heresiarch of the second century, disciple of Valentinus. Substi- tuted to the Catholic Trinity a Quaternity, composed of the Ineffable, the Silence, the Father, and the Truth ; sought mys- teries in the number and position of letters, rejected the sacraments, admitted a prin- ciple of evil, and held women worthy of the priesthood. His disciples were called Marcasians, and spread in Asia, and espe- cially in Gaul and Spain.

    Mark (St.) — One of the four Evangel- ists. Was probably the same as John Mark, mentioned in the Acts (xii. 25). He was the nephew or cousin of St. Barnabas. Mark afterwards became the favorite com- panion and disciple of St. Peter at Rome. Sent on a mission to Egypt by St. Peter, Mark there founded the Church of St. Al- exandria, which he governed till the year 62, when he appointed Annianus his suc- cessor. His life was ended by martyrdom in the year 68. Mark wrote his Gospel in Greek, which, as St. Irenaeus tells us, ap- peared after the death of the Apostles Peter and Paul, and which he is said to have compiled from the preaching of St. Peter, who, also, gave it his sanction. Hence, ancient writers call him the " In- terpreter" of that Apostle. F. April 25fh.




    Mark (St.) — Pope in 333. Roman by birth, rendered a decree conferring upon the Bishop of Ostia the exclusive right to consecrate the sovereign Pontiff. It was he who ordained the recitation at Mass of the symbol of Nice. F. Oct. 7th.

    Mark's Day or Procession on St. M^'i'lc's Day. — The procession on St. Mark's Day was instituted even before the time of Pope Gregory the Great (607) who, how- ever, brought it into fervent practice, " in order," as he says, "to obtain, in a meas- ure, forgiveness of our sins." The same Pope introduced another, called the Seven- fold Procession, because the Faithful of Rome took part in it in seven divisions, from seven different Churches, meeting in the Church of the Blessed Virgin of Santa Maggiore. It was also named the Pest Procession, because it was ordered by St. Gregory to obtain the cessation of a fear- ful pestilence which was at that time raging in Rome, and throughout all Italy. This pestilence so poisoned the atmos- phere that one opening his mouth to sneeze or gape would. suddenly fall dead; hence the custom of saying "God bless you," to one sneezing, and of making the sign of the Cross on the mouth of one who gapes. The same holy Pope ordered the picture of the Blessed Virgin, which is said to have been painted by St. Luke to be carried in this procession, and that the intercession of this powerful mother be asked. God heard these supplications and the pestilence ceased.

    Maronites. — Catholic people of Syria, living in the number of about 500,000 in the district of Tripoli and Libanon. Con- stituted in the seventh century by John the Maronite, the Maronites acknowledged in 1215, the authority of the Pope and placed themselves under the protection of St. Louis, king of France. They use un- leavened bread for the confection of the Eucharist, and, like the rest of the Ori- entals, communicate the laity under both kinds, except that in communicating the sick, only the species of bread is used. They use incense at low Mass, and read the Gospel in Arabic, after it has been read in Syriac, Arabic being the vulgar language in those countries where this rite prevails. Their secular clergy number about one thousand, and their regular clergy or monks, about fourteen hundred. The monks are not married. The patriarch of the Maronites is styled "Patriarch of

    Antioch of the Maronites," and resides at Deir Kanobin, near the Libanon. Besides the patriarch, they have six archbishops and three bishops. The people elect the pa- triarch, who, however, must await the con- firmation of the Pope before he is installed in office.

    Marquette (jAcquES) (1637-1675) — Born at Laon, France; died near Lake Michigan. A French Jesuit missionary and explorer in America. He accompanied Joliet in his voyage down the Wisconsin and Mississippi and up the Illinois in 1673. He died Avhile attempting to es- tablish a mission among the Illinois. He wrote in French a description of the ex- pedition of 1673 entitled Voyage and Dt's' covery of Some Countries and Nations in North America.

    Marriage. See Matrimony ; Bigamy.

    Marriage {Civil). — Civil marriage we call a marriage contracted before some State official. Civil marriage is to be distinguished from Christian marriage, in- asmuch as it is no sacrament, and conse- quently in the sight of God no true and real marriage for Catholics. Civil mar- riage may be said to have originated with Luther, for he prepared the way for the State to legislate concerning marriage. What he began, the French revolution completed ; for marriage was then declared to be a civil contract, concluded before a government official. Civil marriage is obligatory or compulsory when, as is the case in some countries, the marriage is otherwise not recognized by the State ; it is optional when the parties are free to choose whether the ceremony shall be civil or religious, as in America; finally, it is unavoidable, if on account of the priest being debarred from marrying them through political reasons, or on other obvious grounds, the persons desirous of being married cannot be united otherwise than by the secular authorities. We said, civil marriage is no sacrament. However, in England, Scotland, and most of the United States of America, where the de- cree Tametsi of the Council of Trent has not been duly published, marriage con- tracted between two baptized Catholics without the sanction of the Church is a valid marriage and a sacrament, although an unlawful and sacrilegious act. Catho- lics who contract civil marriage, are ex- cluded from the sacraments until they have repaired the scandal they have given.



    Martin of Tours

    Marriage {Mixed). — By mixed marriage we understand the marriage of a Catholic to a non-Catholic. Mixed marriages have always been disapproved of by the Church.

    1. Because in such marriages the proper training of the children is a matter of great difficulty, if not altogether impossible.

    2. Because such unions are productive of no concord, no true happiness. 3. Because the Catholic is in great danger of losing his or her faith. 4. And, besides, the non- Catholic may at any time obtain a divorce, leave his or her Catholic partner, and con- tract another marriage. Even in the Old Testament mixed marriages were pro- hibited ; the Jews were not permitted to make marriages with the Chanaanites (Deut. vii. 3), nor indeed with the Samar- itans, although they kept the law of God and had the Books of Moses, because of the heathen ceremonies they observed. In like manner in the present day the Church discourages the marriage of Catholics to non-Catholics, who, though they call themselves Christians, hold doctrines which are at variance with the teaching of Christ. The Church warns her children against such alliances, just as a loving father might warn his son against under- taking some journey which he knows will expose him to great perils. In early times parents who gave their daughter in mar- riage to a heretic were subjected to five years' penance. The Church tolerates mixed marriages on three conditions: i. Both parties must promise that their chil- dren shall be brought up as Catholics. 3. The Catholic must promise to endeavor to bring the non-Catholic to the knowledge of the truth. 3. The non-Catholic must promise to allow the Catholic liberty for the free exercise of his or her religion. Without these three conditions the Church will not sanction a mixed marriage. The Catholic who contracts a mixed marriage without the blessing of the Church com- mits a mortal sin, and cannot be admitted to the sacraments.

    Martha. — A sister of Lazarus whom our Lord raised from the dead (Luke x. 38, etc.; John xi.). During the great per- secution of the Church at Jerusalem, Martha, Lazarus, Mary Magdalen, and other Christians were placed on a vessel without sails, rudders, pilot, or provi- sions in order to cause them to perish in the midst of the sea. The vessel landed at Marseilles. St. Martha having con-

    verted the inhabitants of the city of Taras- con, lived there until her death in a. d. 84. She was buried in the actual crypt of the Church of St. Martha. She is the patron saint of Tarascon. F. July 29th.

    Martha {Religious of St.) . — Female re- ligious congregation, which draws its origin from the Beguines of the Netherlands and which was founded by Nicholas Robin, chancellor of King Philip the Kind. They have charge of a great number of hospitals in Burgundy.

    Martial (St. ). — First bishop of Limoges, apostle of Aquitaine, in the first century. Jew by origin, of the tribe of Benjamin, disciple of our Saviour, he came to Rome together with St. Peter, and received from the chief of the Apostles the mission to preach the faith among the inhabitants of Gaul. Patron saint of Limoges, Cahors, Tulle, etc. F. June 30th.

    Martin (name of five Popes). — Martin I. (St.) — Pope from 649 to 655. He formally condemned the Monothelites and the two imperial edicts, called Ecthesis and Typos, which forbade all controversy on the sub- ject of Two Wills in Christ. For tliis op- position. Pope Martin, by order of Emperoi Constans II., was forcibly carried to Con- stantinople, and, after many suflFerings, died a martyr in exile. Martin II. — Pope from 882 to 884. Excommunicated Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Martin III. — Successor of Stephen VIII. or IX. in 942 and died in 946. Martin IV. — Pope from 1281 to 1285. Governed the Church with prudence and ability. Excommuni- cated Peter of Aragon, who had taken Sicily. Martin V. — Pope from 1417 to 1431. Was elected after Gregory XII. had abdicated, and after the antipope Benedict XIII. had been deposed. He presided at the 42d session of the Coun- cil of Constance; declared, by a special Bull, " that it was unlawful for any one, either to appeal from the judgment of tha Holy See, or to reject its decisions in mat- ters of faith." He exerted all his efforts to restore industry and commerce in the Papal States, and to carry out the reforms inaugurated at Constance.

    Martin of Tours (St.) (316-400) . — Born at Sabaria, Hungaria; died at Candes, France. Martin became a Christian cate- chumen against his parents' wish ; and at the age of fifteen he was, therefore, seized by his father, a pagan soldier, and enrolled




    in the army. One winter day, when sta- tioned at Amiens, he met a beggar almost naked and frozen. Having no money, he cut his cloak in two and gave him half of it. That night he saw our Lord clothed in the half of his cloak, and heard Him say to the angels: " Martin, yet a catechumen, hath wrapped me in this garment." This decided him to be baptized, and shortly after he left the army. He succeeded in converting his mother; but, being driven from his home by the Arians, he took shelter with St. Hilary, and founded, near Poitiers, the first monastery in France. In 372 he was made bishop of Tours. Un- armed and attended only by his monks, Martin destroyed the heathen temples and groves, and completed by his preaching and miracles, the conversion of the people, whence he is known as the Apostle of Gaul. F. Nov. nth.

    Martinelli (Sebastian). — Archbishop of Ephesus and Apostolic Delegate to the Catholic Church in the United States ; born in the parish of St. Anna, near Lucca, Italy, Aug. 3oth, 1848; the brother of the late Cardinal Tommaso Martinelli. He studied for the priesthood and was admit- ted into the Order of St. Augustine in 1871, and from that time until 1886 was professor of theology in the Irish Augustinian Col- lege in Rome. In 1889 he was appointed General of the Augustinian Order. In 1893 ^^ spent several months in the United States, reorganizing the American branch of his Order. In 1896 he was selected by the Pope as Delegate and the Vatican rep- resentative in the United States, in suc- cession to Cardinal Satolli.

    Martyrologium (the history of the lives, sufferings, and death of Christian martyrs). — The custom of drawing up Martyrologies is so much more natural as the pagans themselves inscribed in their fasces the names of their heroes, in order to preserve to posterity the example of the great actions they had performed. Baron- ius claims that Pope Clement I. introduced this custom into the Church. There is quite a number of Martyrologies : the first is that of Eusebius and of St. Jerome; Cassiodorus quotes it in the sixth century, and Bede in the seventh ; the second is that of Bede, written about the year 730, and augmented by Florus, about the year 839; the third is of Vandelbert, monk of Prom, in the Diocese of Treves, written in 848 ; the fourth was composed, about the year

    845, by Rabanus, Archbishop of Mayence ; the fifth was written, about the year 894, by Notker, surnamed the "Little Stam- merer," monk of St. Gall; the sixth, com- posed about the year 858, by Adon, is a compilation of the Roman Martyrology and of that of Bede; the seventh, made after a copy of that of Adon, was written, in 875, by Usuard, monk of St. Germain- des-Pr^s ; the eighth was composed about the year 1089, by Nevolon, monk of Corbie ; the ninth is the Martyrology of the Copts, kept by the Maronites, at Rome, and mentioned by Father Kircher in his Prodromus; the tenth is the Roman Martyrology which contains the names of all the canonized saints. There are, besides, Martyrologies of particular Churches.

    Martyrs (the name given to those who suffer death or torments for the Christian religion). — It is the constant doctrine of the Fathers, that all men, who suffer martyrdom for Christ, attain remis- sion of all sin and punishment, whether they be infants or adults. By a martyr is here to be understood one who suffers with patience, death, or treatment which would naturally cause death, for the Catho- lic faith or for the practice of any Christian virtue. According to Tertullian, St. John the Evangelist was thrown into a caldron of boiling oil, by order of the Emperor Domitian, and his life was saved by a miracle, so that he eventually died a natural death ; but, nevertheless, he is honored as a martyr. Although the ordi- nary case of martyrdom is death for the faith, still the privilege belongs to many who have died for the sake of other virtues. St. John of Nepomuk died rather than be- tray the secret of confession ; St. Alphege of Canterbury, preferred to die by the hands of the Danes, rather than harshly exercise his legal rights and compel his dependents to raise the money demanded for his ransom; and his successor, St. Thomas, suffered in defense of the liber- ties of the Church.

    The essential character of martyrdom is that death or suffering should be incurred voluntarily in testimony of the truth, and it is to this that the derivation of the word points — martus {a witness). The ordinary definition requires that the martyr should suffer with patience, for otherwise he has scanty likeness to Christ, who was led as a sheep to the slaughter (Is. liii. 7) ; and Tertullian expressly denies that soldiers




    who fall in battle can be called martvrs, however good the cause in which they fight. {Contra Marcion.) Such men are popularly called martyrs, and if the case arise of their being proposed for canoniza- tion, the question will be discussed whether the popular judgment is right or not. The term may be a mere loose expression, like martyr of charity. But whether these Christian heroes would be honored under the name of martyrs or under that of con- fessors, their salvation can hardly depend upon their baptism of blood ; it rarely happens, that they are without the baptism of water, and, even if this happen, they will probably have been justified by the baptism of desire.

    It is impossible to fix the exact number of Christian martyrs that died for the faith in the first three centuries. Dodwell, an Anglican writer of the seventeenth cen- tury, and Gibbon, endeavored to prove that it was insignificant, but their opinion is not shared by more unprejudiced writers. The computation of Bosio, who is justly styled the *' Columbus of the Catacombs," and of other learned men, have led to the estimate that at least five millions — men, women, and children — were put to death for the faith during the first three cen- turies of the Church. Some even believe the total number of Christians martyred during this period to be between nine and ten millions.

    Maruthas. — Bishop of Tagrit, or Mar- tyropolis, in Mesopotamia. Died about 420. He was truly one of the most learned and illustrious writers of the Syriac Church. He was a contemporary and the intimate friend of St. Chrysostom, and assisted at the Council of Constantinople. He converted a great number of Persians and extended the faith throughout Persia. Of his works extant are Acts of the Per- sian Martyrs, who suffered under Sapor n. and his successors, a History of the Council of Nice, and a Syriac Liturgy. The thirty-six canons of the synod held in 410 at Seleucia, in which the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son is clearly expressed, are in part his work.

    Mary {Brothers of). See Brothers.

    Mary Immaculate ( Oblates of). — A religious community founded in 1816 by Monseigneur Charles de Mazenod, subse- quently bishop of Marseilles, and approved

    by Leo XH., in 1826. After laboring for many years among the Indian tribes of Athabasca- Mackenzie, came to the United States in 1848, where they have now sev- eral houses, mostly in Texas and Louis- iana.

    Mary {The Blessed Virgin ) ( 20 b. c.- SaA.D). — The Blessed Virgin, Mother of Jesus Christ, daughter of St. Joachim and of St. Anna, of the tribe of Juda and of the royal race of David, was born at Nazareth. Predestined from all eternity to be the mother of the Saviour of men, she was ex- empt in her conception from original sin. Mary was consecrated to the Lord, from her most tender youth, and was received among the number of the virgins who ser\'ed in the Temple of Jerusalem. At about the age of fifteen years, she was betrothed to St. Joseph, who was also of the tribe of Juda and of the rojal race of David. She lived at Nazareth with her spouse, who was only the guardian of her virginity. Shortly after this marriage, the angel Ga- briel appeared to Mary, announced to her that she would conceive through the power of the Holy Ghost and that, without ceasing to be a virgin, she would be the mother of Christ, the Son of God, whom she would call Jesus. Mary humbly answered to the angel : " Behold the handmaid of the Lord ; be it done to me according to thy word." An angel explained the same mystery to St. Joseph. Mary went to visit her cousin St. Elizabeth who lived at Hebron; the latter, divinely inspired, saluted her say- ing: "Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb." Then Mary, p)enetrated with gratitude and supernatural light, praised God, by chant- ing her sublime canticle, the Magnificat. In the same year, the Roman Emperor, Augustus, haN-ing ordered the enumeration of his subjects, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem, the native place of their fam- ily, in order to be recorded. Here the Blessed Virgin Mary brought forth the Son of God, the Redeemer of mankind. After ha\nng presented Him in the Temple of Jerusalem on the day of Purification, Mary and Joseph fled with the child Jesus into Egypt, because King Herod sought to kill Him. Herod having died, the Holy Family left Egypt and returned to dwell at Nazareth, in Galilee. It was Mary who recovered the child Jesus in the Tem- ple, explaining the law to the doctors and astonishing them by the wisdom of His




    words. It was at her request that Jesus Christ changed water into wine at the nuptials of Cana. She accompanied her divine Son during His public life, fol- lowed Him to Calvary and remained erect at the foot of the Cross with a courage worthj of the mother of God. Recom- mended by the dying Saviour to His well- beloved disciple, St. John the Evangelist, the latter took care of her as of his own mother, and took her with him to Ephesus. But, according to tradition, Mary died at Jerusalem, at the advanced age of seventy- two years. Also, an ancient tradition teaches us that the Apostles, then dis- persed all over the world for the preach- ing of the Gospel, miraculously found themselves assembled around her and wit- nessed her death. Her remains were de- posited in a tomb at Gethsemani, and this tomb, like that of Jesus, became glorious. God glorified the body of Mary, who had served as tabernacle to the Word, in caus- ing it to be transported into heaven by His angels. The Apostle St. Thomas, the hagiographers tell us, who was not present at the death of the Blessed Virgin, arrived on the third day, and, wishing to venerate that body which had brought forth the Saviour, requested the sepulchre to be opened. They no longer found the sacred remains, but only the winding sheet in which it had been wrapped. The Apostles recognized and proclaimed that the body of Mary was already reunited with its soul and had been gloriously raised into heaven.

    Mary {Feasts of). — The principal feasts in honor of the Blessed Virgin are: Im- maculate Conception, Dec. 8th; Nativity, Sept. 8th ; Betrothal of Mary and Joseph, Jan. 23d; Annunciation, March 25th; Visi- tation, July 2d ; Purification, Feb. 2d ; Assumption, Aug. 15th. Only the first and last of these feasts are of precept in the United States.

    "bHa-Tj {Prerogatives of). — The venera- tion which the Church renders to the Blessed Virgin Mary is founded upon the same reasons and motives as that which she renders to other saints, with the differ- ence that the first is superior, although it essentially differs from the worship we owe to God. In fact, when all the saints can intercede for us, and when God is pleased to listen to their prayers, with much more reason does she merit our confidence, who was blessed among all women, and who, in consenting to become the Mother

    of God, has become, says St. Irenaeus, the cause of salvation for all mankind. She is also the object of a particular veneration in the Church, which has always regarded her as our advocate with God, celebrating her titles, virtues, and glory. All the gen- erations have called her and will call her blessed, because the Almighty has done great things in her : Mary is the Mother of God and this title elevates her above the saints and angels, above all creatures. She is the Mother of God in the full sense of the word : she conceived and brought forth, as to the humanity, Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man ; in her bosom the Word was made flesh. Mary in becoming the Mother of God, never ceased to be a virgin ; she was a virgin when the angel announced to her the mystery to be oper- ated in her ; she remained a virgin in con- ceiving the one who is holy far excellence. She conceived through the operation of the Holy Ghost. She remained a virgin after childbirth, which, having been done in a supernatural manner, could not impair her virginal integrity. The Church believes that the Blessed Virgin Mary never com- mitted any sin, not even a venial one; the exemption from all actual sin is a privilege which we acknowledge in Mary, and which has never been contested among Catholics. The Council of Trent declared that nobody can, during his whole life, avoid all sin, without a special privilege of God, as the Church believes in regard to the Blessed Virgin. It is an article of faith that Mary has been even exempt from original sin. By his Apostolic Constitution of Dec. 8th, 1854, th^ immortal Pius IX. has solemnly defined and proclaimed as dogma of belief the Immaculate Conception of the glorious Virgin Mary, Mother of God. Another prerogative of Mary is her corporal As- sumption into heaven. It is the general belief of the Church; that the Blessed Vir- gin was raised to life immediately after her death, and that she is in heaven both body and soul. This pious belief is founded upon tradition, and on the sentiments of piety which we should have for the Mother of God.

    Maspha. — Name of several localities of ancient Palestine, among others of a village in the tribe of Gad. Residence of Samuel ; here the great assemblies of the people took place. To-day the village of Chafath.

    Mass (The Latin word missa is derived from missis, which signifies a dismissal or

    Mass of Bolsena

    462 Mass of the Presanctified

    permission to depart as soon as the sacri- fice of the Mass is completed). — The sac- rifice of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, according to the rite prescribed.

    The Eucharist as sacrifice is designated under different names bj the ancient Fathers ; but since a long time it is univer- sally called sacrifice of the Mass. Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law, by which we offer to God, through the hands of the priest, the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, under the species of bread and wine. The sacrifice is, by its nature, an act of supreme worship which is rendered to God alone, and which is called latria worship. Thus if the Mass of a saint is said, it must not be understood that we offer the sacrifice of the Mass to this saint, but that we make commemoration of the saint and pray to him to intercede for us. The sacrifice of the Mass has the same properties, the same effects as the sacrifice of the Cross, from which it differs only in the manner it is offered on our altars. It is, consequently, latreutical, eucharistic, imprecatory, and propitiatory. In regard to the fruits of the sacrifice of the Mass, we distinguish the general fruit, which is common to all the Faithful, the living and the dead retained in purgatory; the special fruit, which is for all those who assist or take some part in the celebration of the Mass ; the more special fruit, which is particularly for those at whose intention the Mass is said ; finally, the personal fruit, applied to the priest who says the Mass. The priests, and priests alone can offer the sacrifice of the Mass, acting in the name of Jesus Christ, and with Jesus Christ Who renews and continues upon our altars the sacrifice of the Cross. According to the general and constant practice of the Church, the one for whom the priest especially offers the sacrifice of the Mass, partakes with greater abundance in the merits of Jesus Christ which are ap- plied therein. Hence the custom of Catho- lics to ask for one or several Masses in favor of the living and of the dead ; hence the custom of the foundations (founded Masses) obliging to say a certain number of Masses; hence, finally, the necessary fees or stipends for the Masses to be said. Every laborer is worthy of reward ; every man that ser^-es the altar ought to live from the altar. The stipend of a Mass is neither the price of the consecration, nor an alms properly speaking; the priest who is rich may, as well as the one who is poor, receive and even ask for a stipend if re-

    quested to say one or several Masses ac- cording to the intention of one of the Faithful. For the obligation of hearing Mass, see Commaxdmexts.

    The ordinary of the Mass comprises the Introit, the Oration or Collect, the Epistle, Gradual, Gospel, Preface, the Canon which comprises' Consecration and Elevation, with Communion, and Post- Communion, the last Oration, the Bless- ing of those assisting, and the last Gospel. The Requiem Masses or Masses for the dead are especially applied to the Faith- ful departed, although any other Mass may be said according to this intention. Votive Mass we call the Mass which the particular devotion of somebody causes to be said in honor of a mystery, or of the Blessed Virgin, or of other saints. Votive Masses do not correspond with the office of the day. On all days except Sundays, feasts of double and more than double rank, and certain other days especially ex- cepted, a priest may say a Votive Mass, instead of that assigned for the day. See Sacrifice of the Mass.

    Mass of Bolsena. — Bolsena is a town of Italy. In this place a priest, while cele- brating Mass in the Church of St. Cath- arine, which still exists, let some drops of the Precious Blood fall accidentally on the corporal. To remove the traces of this oc- currence, he folded and refolded the sacred linen in such a way as to absorb the Ador- able Blood. The corporal was afterwards opened, and it was found that the Blood had penetrated all the folds and left every- where a figure of the Sacred Host, per- fectly drawn, in the color of blood. The rumor of what had happened arrived in a few hours at Orvieto, a small town about sixty miles from Rome, near Bolsena, and where Pope Urban IV. was just stopping. By the command of the sovereign Pontiff, the miraculous linen was brought to his town. The miracle was proved, and the corporal inclosed in a reliquary, one of the masterpieces of the Middle Ages, — and is kept to this day in the cathedral of Orvieto. Moved by the miracle of Bolsena, and by the desire to promote the devotion to the Blessed Eucharist, Urban IV., in 1264, commanded the celebration of the Festival of Corpus Christi throughout the Church. See Corpus Christi.

    Mass of the Presanctified. Friday.

    See Good




    Massilians. — Name given to the semi- Pelagians, from the city of Marseilles, where they were most numerous. See Semi-Pelagians.

    Massillon (Jean Baptiste) (1663-1743). — Prelate and preacher of the Order of the Oratory, born at Hyeres, died at Cler- mont. He lived for many years in a monastery ( Sept-Fonts ); and in 1696 was called to Paris, where he became director of the seminary of St. Magloire and, in 1704, court preacher, attaining great celeb- rity as a public orator. In 1717 he was made bishop of Clermont, and became an Academician in 1719- His works ( includ- ing sermons, funeral orations, etc.) were published in 15 volumes, 1745-1748.

    Massorah or Masora. — The tradition by which Jewish scholars endeavored to fix the correct text of the Old Testament, so as to preserve it from all corruption. The Masora dates from the ninth century. There is a two-fold Masora, a Babylonian or Eastern, and a Palestinian or Western; the former being the most important. The Masora not only takes account of various readings, but also contains notes of a gram- matical and lexicographical character, in- cluding the system of Hebrew vowel-points first established by it. With much that is valueless, it contains all the material from which a critical revision of the Old Testa- ment text can now be derived.

    Materialism (system of those who believe that all is matter). — Materialism is repre- sented in antiquity by the Atomistic and Epicurian Schools. Atomistic School. — All the bodies are composed of material, eternal, and self-moving atoms. The move- ment by which they operate their diflFerent combinations is proper to them. The diversity of the bodies results from the di- versity of the atoms. The soul, like all other earthly bodies is an aggregation of atoms. It distinguishes itself from the other bodies only by the roundness, subtility, and swift- ness of the atoms which constitute it. The material soul becomes decomposed at the moment of death into its constituent atoms and ceases to exist. The physics of Epi- curus are those of Democritus. The soul is composed of atoms, fire, air, and light, which diflfer from those of the body by a greater degree of mobility and subtility. The only source of knowledge is the sensi- ble impression produced, in contact with our organs, by the images continually dis-

    engaging themselves from the bodies by a perpetual emission of the atoms which compose them. Sensible ideas are obtained from general ideas. Such is, in general, the teaching of Materialism. In modern times, Materialism, as a doctrine, has been taught by Hobbes, Gassendi, Hel- vetius, Lamettrie, Broussais ; hidden under various names, it is true, Sensualism arrives at the same result : the negation of the immaterial soul. According to Hobbes, nothing exists except matter; the soul is material like all other sub- stances ; all our ideas are derived from sen- sation. There is no justice; each one has no other rule but his own interest and pas- sion. Materialism, under the name of Sensualism, has been taught by Condillac. Condillac starts from the empiric doctrine of Locke, but he reduces it to a material- istic sensualism. Locke distinguished two sources of our ideas : reflection, active principle which adds to sensation the pas- sive principle; he admitted the activity of the soul and acknowledged the necessity of this activity in the formation of our ideas. Condillac, on the contrary in his Traits des Sensations, denies this activity, claiming the derivation of all the faculties and reflection itself, from the sole prin- ciple of sensation. Attention, according to him, is only a sensation, which by its liveliness, absorbs the soul and carries it away over all other sensations ; hence it is a simple transformation of sensation. Attention proceeds from sensation, and from the attention proceed all the other intellectual faculties ; comparison and judgment are only a double attention ; reasoning is only a result of judgments. Thus all the intellectual faculties are trans- formations of the attention, which itself is only a transformation of sensation. It is the same with the moral faculties that constitute the will. The Ego does not ex- ist apart from the sensations; it is only the collection of its sensations. Helvetius, Saint-Lambert, Volney, Lamettrie, push- ing to the extreme the consequences of this system which pretends to explain man through sensation, have ended in material- ism and set up self-interest and pleasure as the supreme moral good, as the only rule between good and evil. While Condillac had taught only a sensualism which virtu- ally contains materialism, Helvetius in his Esprit, and Lamettrie in his Homme Ma- chine maintain that the soul is material, re- duce all our faculties to physical sensibility.

    Math A



    and acknowledge between man and beast only the differences introduced by the dif- ference of conformation. Certain savants of our day, supporting themselves upon cer- tain physiological relations of the brain and thought, claim that the laws of matter are sufficient to explain life and thought. In support of their system they appeal to the most recent discoveries of science: transformation of forces ; mechanical the- ory of heat and light; but if the movement converts itself into heat, why does it not convert itself into thought.? We do not deny the progress of science, but it always remains true that the dynamists and ma- terialists found their theory upon a con- tradictory hypothesis ; for movement and thought are not of the same order as ideas. Movement is a mode accessible to the senses; thought, on the contrary, is known only through conscience ; it is essentially simple and indivisible. The one is not the other, and it is repugnant to common sense and to reason to say that the one becomes the other. It is true that there are certain relations between our soul and our organs, but to conclude from this that the soul and organism are identical, is committing a real sophism.

    Matha (St. John of). See Trixita-


    Mathew (Theobald). — Apostle of tem- perance in Ireland ; bom at Thomastown, five miles west of Cashel, Oct. loth, 1790; died at Queenstown, Dec. 8th, 1856. He was educated at Maynooth and Dublin ; ordained priest in 1814; entered the Ca- puchin Order, and was soon stationed at Cork. In April, 1838, he began a crusade against intemperance, which attained won- derful success, owing to his winning per- sonal qualities ; 200,000 signed the pledge in less than a year. He traveled over Ire- land, visited England (1844), and America (1849-1851), winning numerous recruits everywhere. He was a bad financier, and became heavily involved in debt, from which a pension of £300, granted in 1847, partially relieved him.

    Mathurins. See Mercy {Order of).

    Matins. — The first part of the divine of- fice. See Breviary.

    Matrimony. — Matrimony or marriage V..S instituted at the beginning of the world, when God joined together our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen. ii. 25).

    Marriage was elevated to the dignity of a sacrament by our Lord Jesus Christ, to sanctify the union of the sexes. Marriage is the legitimate alliance of man and woman, by their mutual and free consent, contracted according to the laws of the Church. It is a sacrament by the contract of the two parties in holy union, which is the outward sign productive of grace. St. Paul speaks of it as being "a great sacrament" (Ephes. V. 32). Husbands and wives are recommended to love each other in matri- mony " as Christ also loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life" (Ephes. v. 25, 26). Marriage is defined, as an article of faith by the Church, to be a sacrament.

    When our Lord instituted the sacrament of matrimony, is not exactly expressed in Scripture, but possibly, when He restored marriage to its original institution, He conferred upon it the dignity and grace of a sacrament.

    The Church exacts a publication of mat- rimonial banns before celebrating the nuptial rites, in order that obstacles, if there be any, may be discovered. It is the duty of every one who is cognizant of an impediment to make it known to ecclesi- astical authority. Christians, free of all impediments, and having attained the age specified by the Church, can receive this sacrament ; but those finding themselves bound by restrictions before entering the matrimonial state, can only be released by special dispensation proceeding from eccle- siastical authority. Prohibitive impedi- ments render a marriage illicit and sinful, but not void; diriment impediments, how- ever, nullify a marriage. The principal prohibitive impediments are : solemnizing marriage at certain times of the year for- bidden by the Church, that is to say, dur- ing Advent and Lent ; diflference of religion between Catholics and heretics; a simple vow of chastity, etc. The principal diri- ment impediments are : clandestine mar- riage, that is, without the presence of the authorized priest and two witnesses — al- though in the United States, except in a few places, clandestine marriages are ad- mitted as valid ; lack of reason or proper age, the solemn vow of chastity implicitly contained in the reception of the subdiac- onate, diaconate, and priesthood, and taken by members of religious orders; proximity of relationship; disparity of religion be- tween a Catholic and an infidel ; absence of




    free consent, that is, when marriage is forced on anyone by violence or unjust menace of a serious nature, fraud, error, etc. Those persons who are married only by civil law, and not before God, in presence of the proper pastor of the parish, or other priest deputed to replace him, and two witnesses, wherever the decree Tameisi of the Council of Trent is published, are declared by the Church to be living in mor- tal sin, and their marriage is void, by virtue of the right our Lord gave His Church, in the promise He made to His ministers : "Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven ; and whatso- ever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven " (Matt, xviii. 18).

    For the right reception of the sacrament of matrimony, we must be in a state of grace, having so disposed our souls by pious participation in the sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist, that we may obtain the graces so necessary for the just fulfillment of obligations, and patient bearing of trials incidental to, or neces- sarily accompanying, the matrimonial state. Confession is strongly recom- mended before marriage, but is not obli- gatory if the contracting persons are in a state of grace. Those who, in mortal sin, present themselves for the reception of this sacrament, not only do not receive the grace of the sacrament, but are guilty of a sacrilegious sin, and expose themselves to the malediction of heaven. Moreover, it is written : " Every best gift, and every per- fect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights" (Jas. i. 17). Those who marry should, therefore, pray to God for the gift of understanding in the choice of that person to whom they are to be united until death, and upon whom their happiness in this world shall so much depend. They should consult their parents and their confessor; they should take every possible precaution to know correctly the person's heart, mind, reli- gious principles, and character; having, also, a care as to suitability of age, condi- tion, and fortune. For disproportionate alliances of any kind are often unhappy ones. They should approach the holy state of matrimony with a firm intention to regard sacredly those reasons for which God established it, and pass the marriage day in a sinless manner. They should give mutual protection and companionship through the trials and sufferings of life, supporting, comforting, and sanctifying


    each other, by the supernatural influence of this sacrament; working together in unity of spirit for eternal salvation ; loving one another with an attachment subordi- nate only to their love for God, and bring- ing to Him, through baptism in the Church, the children He has committed to their charge, educating them in a Christian manner to love and serve Him faithfully and obtain everlasting life. See Bigamy; Celibacy; Divorce.

    Matrimony ( Unity of) or Marriage. — By the unity of marriage is meant the rule by which polygamy is forbidden to Chris- tians. This unity may be regarded as pe- culiarly characteristic of the Christian law, for among all peoples where civilization is not based on Christianity, we may expect to meet with the recognition of polygamy, or perhaps polyandry. Probably no sect that claimed to be called Christian has ever held polygamy to be justifiable as a general practice, although there are some cases where persons professing to be Chris- tian ministers have permitted, or at least connived at it, in peculiar cases. The American Latter Day Saints, or Mormons, are not an exception, for they have slender claims to be called Christian. We have proof of the disastrous effect of polygamy upon society in the fact that bigamy is punished as a crime in all states whose civ- ilization has been derived from the Gospel, however little inclined their governments may now be influenced by religious consid- erations. Unity of marriage is part of the original institution. This follows from the accounts of Genesis, where we read that: " they shall be two in one flesh, not three or more." This law was in some sense relaxed in favor of the Patriarchs and those that came after them (Gen. iv. 19, etc.). The doctrine follows clearly from the words of Christ, citing the passage from Genesis (Matt. xix. 5) and from the express teaching of St. Paul (I. Cor. vii. 2-5). Also the Council of Trent (Sess. xxiv. can. 2) defines, that it is unlawful for Christians to have more than one wife at a time. The Christian law does not forbid successive marriages, when after the death of one spouse, the other contracts a new alliance. But a certain stigma attaches to conduct which has some appearance of in- ordinateness; and St. Paul (L Cor. vii. 39, 40) uses language which certainly discour- ages the second marriage of a widow. See Marriage {Civil); Marriage {Mixed).




    Matthew (St.). — Apostle and Evangel- ist. St. Matthew is the same as Levi, mentioned in the Gospel of St. Luke (v. 27). Son of Alpheus, born near Capharnaum ; collector of the taxes which the Jews had to pay to the Romans. Tradition relates that he labored for some time in Palestine, after the Ascension of Christ, and then preached the Gospel in Syria, Persia, Parthia, and Ethiopia. In the last-named country, he is said to have ended his course by martyrdom. Matthew was the first of the Evangelists who wrote a Gos- pel, which appeared between the years 64 and 67, or, according to others, in the year 42, about the time of the dispersion of the Apostles. He wrote in Hebrew or Syro-Chaldaic, the language spoken in Palestine at that time. The original is no longer extant, but the Greek version, even in the time of the Apostles, was of equal authority. F. Sept. 21st.

    Matthias (St.). — Apostle, died in the year 63. Was elected to fill the place of the traitor Judas ; according to Nicephorus, after having preached in Judea, evangel- ized Ethiopia, where he ended his apostolic career on the cross. According to another tradition, he returned to Judea and there ■was stoned and beheaded. F. Feb. 25th.

    Maundy Thursday. See Thursday KHoly).

    Maurice (St.). See Legion ( Tkebcan).

    Maurists. — Members of a reformed re- ligious congregation established in France in 1618, with the view of reviving the pristine austerity of the Rule of St. Bene- dict, and for the advancement of literature and learning. In the sphere of ecclesias- tical history, of patristic lore, and of archaeology, the Maurists have earned im- mortal honors, especially by their critical editions of the Fathers of the Church, and by learned treatises and historico-polem- ical writings.

    Maximus (St.). — Bishop of Jerusalem and confessor, died in 350. Condemned to the mines by Maximian Galerus, assisted, covered with noble scars for the faith, at the Councils of Nice (325), and of Tyre (335) ; held a Council at Jerusalem (349) ; defended St. Athanasius and vigorously combated the Arians who drove him away from his see. F. May 5th.

    Maximus (St.) (sumamed "The Con- fessor"; 580-662). — Greek monk, born at

    Constantinople. He was a scion of a noble family and was secretary to Emperor Her- aclius ; but resigning his office at court, he retired to a monastery near Constantinople, of which he became abbot. In 645 he held a public Conference at Carthage with the Monothelite Patriarch Pyrrhus of Con- stantinople, whom he induced to abjure his errors. Under Emperor Constans II., Max- imus was cruelly persecuted for refusing to sign the "Typos " ; he was deprived of his tongue and right hand, and sent into exile, where he died. Of the many works of this Father are to be mentioned his commen- taries on divers books of Scripture, and on the works attributed to Dionysius the Are- opagite, besides a number of smaller trea- tises and polemic discourses against the Monothelites. F. Aug. 13th.

    Maximus of Turin (St.) . — Born at Ver- celli ; died in 466. Bishop of Turin ; cele- brated as a Christian orator and for his zeal in preaching, for which function he qualified himself by the study of the Holy Scriptures and the writings of St. Ambrose. Maximus acted a prominent part in the Council of Milan in 451, which subscribed to the "Dogmatical Epistle" of Leo the Great to Flavian, and at the Council of Rome in 465, to which he subscribed, first, after Pope Hilary, on account of his sen- iority. The works of Maximus consist of 116 sermons, three treatises on baptism, two treatises respectively entitled Contra Paganos, and Contra ^udtsos, besides a collection of expositions, De Capitulis Evangeliorum .

    McCloskey (John). — An American car- dinal ; born in Brooklyn, New York, March 2oth, 1810. He was educated at St. Mary's College, Emmittsburg, Maryland, and in 1834 was ordained priest. He studied in Rome for two years, and in 1837 was ap- pointed pastor of St. Joseph's Church, New York city. In 1841, he became the first president of Fordham College, New York, but held the post only a year. In 1844 he was consecrated bishop, and made coadju- tor of the Diocese of New York. In 1847 he was appointed bishop of the new see of Albany, and while there he founded the theological seminary at Troy. In 1864 he was named archbishop of New York to succeed Archbishop Hughes, and in 1875 was created cardinal, being the first of that rank in the American Church. He died in New York city, Oct. loth, 1885.




    McGlynn. (Edward). — An American clergyman ; born in New York city, Sept. 27th, 1837. In i860 he was ordained priest, and in 1866 became pastor of St. Stephen's Church in New York city. In 1886, on account of his ignoring the papal demands to appear at the Vatican on a charge of supporting Henry George's single-tax the- ories and opposing the establishment of parochial schools, he was excommunicated. In 1887 l^i"- McGlynn became president of the Anti- Poverty Society, and in behalf of his economic opinions he lectured in nearly all the principal cities of the United States. In the latter part of 1893 he was reinstated in his clerical functions. Died Jan. 7th, 1900.

    Measures. See Weights.

    Mechitarists. — An order of Armenian monks in communion with the Holy See, under a rule resembling the Benedictine, founded by Peter Mechitar at Constanti- nople in 1701, and finally settled on the is- land of St. Lazzaro, near Venice, in 1717. Confirmed by the Pope in 1712. St. Laz- zaro is still their chief seat, while they have an independent monastery at Vienna, and branches in Russia, France, Italy, Turkey, etc. The Mechitarists are devoted to the religious and literary interests of the Armenian race wherever found, and have published many ancient Armenian manuscripts as well as original works. Their society is also organized as a Liter- ary Academy which confers honorary mem- bership without regard to race or religion.

    Media. — Vast country of ancient Asia ; capital Ecbatanea. Arbaces was its first l^ing (759 B. c). Cyrus united it to the kingdom of the Persians, in 560 b. c.

    Meditation. See Prayer.

    Melanchthon (Philip). — Grecized from Schwarzerd, /. e., Blackearth (1497-1560). Strong and zealous fellow-laborer of Lu- ther. Was the grandnephew of the famous scholar Reuchlin, on whose recommenda- tion he was appointed professor of Greek in the University of Wittenberg, and thus became the colleague, and soon an ardent admirer of Luther. More moderate and prudent than Luther, he was an invaluable aid to the latter, who was not unfrequently guided by his counsels. Melanchthon thus played a prominent part in the Lutheran movement, aiding him by his talents and his writings. He attended the Leipzig

    disputation, and, disregarding the promise made to Dr. Eck, published a partial and untruthful account of the discussion. In 1521, he wrote in defense of his master the Oration for Luther, and a Protest against the Decision of the Paris University.

    Melania ( St. ) (surnamed the * ' Younger," 388-439). — Roman lady, married to Pini- anus, son of a Roman prefect, left, together with her husband, their home at Rome and went to Jerusalem. After having lived in the observances of a religious life, Melania, together with other ladies, consecrated herself to God. Pinianus also entered a male monastery, and they both died in the odor of sanctity. Melania the Elder (343- 410). — Grandmother of the preceding; was a relative of St. Paulinus of Nola. She is also honored as a saint, although her name does not figure in the Martyrologies.

    Melchiades ( St. ). See Miltiades.

    Melchisedech (Hebr. king of justice). — King of Salem, poetic name of Jerusalem. Abraham, returning from his pursuit of Chodorlahomor, was blessed by him, and in return received the tenth part of the spoils. The Epistle to the Hebrews (vi. 20; vii. 4-21 ) represents him as a prototype of Christ ; his charge would have been supe- rior to the priesthood of that of Aaron's family.

    Melchisedechians. — Heretics of the third century, whose founder was a certain Theodotus, surnamed the " Banker," and who taught that Melchisdech was greater than Christ.

    Melchites. — i. Name which certain heretics gave to the orthodox Christians of the East who had followed the prescrip- tions of the Council of Chalcedon sanc- tioned by the Emperor Marcian. 2. Chris- tians who, without belonging to the Greek communion, have adopted, in great part, the doctrines and rites of that Church. A large number of Syrian and Egyptian Melchites are at present in communion with the Holy See; they number upward of 35,000 members. See Oriental Rites.

    Meletius. — Bishop of Sebaste, Patriarch of Antioch, in 361. Was exiled and de- posed from his see several times by Con- stantius and Valens. He' presided over the Council at Antioch where they con- demned the errors of ApoUinaris. He died during the Council of Constantinople, in 381.




    Meletius. — Heresiarch, died in 326. Bishop of Lycopolis, was condemned bj? the Council of Alexandria ; hy the Coun- cil of Nice (325) ; allied himself with the Arians to combat St. Athanasius. Meletius became the author of a schism which for about sixty years was the cause of much confusion and great disturbance in the Egyptian Church. Usurping the author- ity of his metropolitan, Peter of Alexan- dria, he set at naught the remonstrances of his fellow-bishops, and undertook to exercise full episcopal jurisdiction in their dioceses. On this occount, he was deposed and excommunicated by the above men- tioned Councils.

    Melita. — An island south of Sicily, on which St. Paul was shipwrecked during his voyage to Rome (Acts xxviii.).

    Melito (St.). — Apologist, and Bishop of Sardes. He ranks among the most bril- liant lights of the Eastern Church of the second century, and the most learned men of that age. His literary labors extended to all the great ecclesiastical questions that agitated his time. Unfortunately, we only possess fragments of one or the other of his numerous literary works, among which the Eclogce (extracts from Sacred Scripture in six books) was the most im- portant, while his Apology, presented to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, A. d. 170 or 171, was the last in point of time. His doctrine was not free from Anthropomor- phism, nor from Chiliastic views. He died between 171 and 180. Eusebius calls him " a man who administered all things in the Holy Ghost."

    Memento. — They have designated, under this Latin word, that part of the Mass where the priest makes commemoration of the Living and the Dead, In the Memento for the Living, the priest prays for the liv- ing members of the Church, naming those for whom he wishes to offer special suppli- cation. In the Memento for the Dead, he implores the deliverance of the souls from purgatory, of those who have gone before us with profession of the faith, and sleep the "sleep of peace."

    Menander. — Gnostic of the first century, disciple of Simon the Magician. He bap- tized in his name, and pretended, accord- ing to St. Irenaeus, that he was the " Great Power " sent by the angels to save the world. His baptism, he claimed, rendered immortal, in this life, those who received it.

    Mendicant Orders are those religious orders which originally depended for sup- port on the alms they received. The prin- cipal mendicant orders are the Francis- cans, the Dominicans, the Carmelites, and the Augustinians.

    Mennonites.— A Protestant sect. The Anabaptists, the everlasting reproach of the Reformation, subsequently became known under the name of "Mennonites." Menno Simonis, a native of Friesland, and an apostate priest, joined the sect in 1536, and assuming their leadership, succeeded in appeasing their frenzy, and organized them into a community. He drew up a system of doctrine and discipline of a much more moderate nature than that of the ear- lier Anabaptists. The Mennonites reject infant baptism as useless ; they believe in the Millennium and assert the prohibition of oaths, the abolition of wars, and that it is unlawful for Christians to hold public offices ; on the other hand, they enjoin obedience to the civil authorities as a religious duty. Menno died in 1561. Members of the sect are found in the Netherlands, Germany, Russia, etc., and especially in the United States.

    There are twelve branches of Menno- nites in the United States. The '* Men- nonite Church"; the "Amish " or followers of Jacob Amen, who separated on account of a dispute on Church discip- line and were often called "Hookers" because o' their refusal to wear but- tons on their clothing; the " Bruderhof Mennonites," founded by Jacob Hunter in 1536, and who are " communists " ; the " Old Amish," or strict adherents to an- cient customs; the " Apostolic," a branch of the Amish; the "Reformed Menno- nites," separatists under Jacob Herr in 1812 ; " General Conference Mennonites," who originated in 1848 under John Ober- holzer, believe in an educated ministry and in worldly conformity, and who, in 1895. had 100 ministers, 5 churches, and 6,000 members, and support an orphans' home at BlufTton, Ohio ; " Church of God in Christ," or " Quaker" Mennonites, who originated in 1859; "Old (Wisler) Men- nonites," originated in Elkhart county, Indiana, about 1870; " Bundes Conferenz der Bruder-Gemeinde," who originated in Russia, and are immersionists ; " Defense- less Mennonites," another branch of the Amish; and " Mennonite Brethren in Christ," who originated about 1879, are




    Methodistic in discipline, have open com- munion and optional forms of baptism. They number about 4,000 communicants, sustain an orphans' home at Berlin, On- tario, and a foreign mission at Wuhu, China. In 1895 these 12 branches reported an aggregate of 950 ministers, 600 churches, and 47,669 communicants. The largest were the Mennonite Church, with 18,378 members, and the Amish, with 10,700 mem- bers. A close affiliation exists between these two branches.

    Menologium, in the Greek Church, is the name for martyrologium of the Latin Church.

    Mercy ( Order of). — A religious order founded by St. Peter Nolasco, in I2i8, for the redemption of captives. It was insti- tuted with the co-operation of the king of Aragon and of St. Rymond of Pennafort, and was approved by Gregory IX., in 1230. These religious, who adhered to the Rule of St. Augustine, are often called "Ma- thurins" from their house at Paris which was situated near the chapel of St. Matu- rin. Between the years 1492 and 1691, this order, alone, rescued nearly 17,000 Chris- tian captives.

    Mercy (Sisters of), — A religious order founded in Dublin by Miss Catharine Mc- Auley in 1834. It was formally confirmed by Gregory XVI. in 1840. Its members devote themselves to the aid and rescue of suffering and tempted women. It spread rapidly throughout the English-speaking world. In the United States the first house was established at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, in 1843.

    Merit (that which renders us worthy of esteem). — We distinguish two kinds of merit ; merit properly speaking, which we call condign merit, and merit improperly speaking, or congruous merit. The first kind is founded upon a promise from the part of God, and the reward is so to say an act of justice. In regard to the second, as there has been no promise, the reward, if we may call it thus, is only an act of good- ness and mercy ; it is a gratuitous gift in every respect. It is of faith that, with the grace of God, the just can really merit both an increase of grace and eternal life and even an increase of heavenly glory. By admitting the merits of the just, do we not commit an injury to the merits of Jesus Christ? No, because, according to Catho- lic dogma, our merits draw their whole

    value from the merits of Christ. In order to merit, both the condign and congruous merit, man must be still alive ; one cannot merit either in hell, or in purgatory, not even in the sojourn of glory; the act must be good in every respect, and must have a supernatural goodness. An action, al- though morally good, if it is this only nat- urally, has neither any proportion with merit, nor with eternal life, whose object it is ; the act must be voluntary and abso- lutely free. The contrary proposition has been condemned as heretical. These dif- ferent conditions are indispensable for merit in general, but they are not suffi- cient, except for the congruous merit, which is not a merit properly speaking. For the condign merit, there is needed, besides, that man is in the state of grace; that God has promised to grant us some- thing as a reward for our works ; He can become, so to say, our debtor, only in vir- tue of the engagements which He was pleased to make with men. See Grack.

    Merodach-Baladan. — King of Babylon. He sent presents to Ezechias, king of Juda, about 720 B.C. He is named in the Khor- sabad inscriptions as having been twice defeated and exiled by Sennacherib.

    Merom ( Waters of) . — A lake in Pales- tine, ten and one-half miles north of the Sea of Galilee, traversed by the Jordan ; the modern Bahr-el-Hulch, and the Seme- chonitis Lake of Josephus. Length, four miles. It was the scene of a great victory of Josue over Jabin, king of Azor.

    Mesa. — A king of Moab about 890 b. c. He is mentioned in IV. Ki. iii. as having been subject to the kings of Israel, but after Achab's death he fell away. Here- upon Joram, king of Israel, in alliance with Josaphat, king of Juda, undertook an expe- dition against him, and shut him up in Kir-Haresbeth, situated a little to the east of the Dead Sea. In this emergency Mesa sacrificed his firstborn to Chemosh. The Israelites thereupon departed to their land. In 1866 a stele was discovered near Dibon, the ancient capital of Moab, on which Mesa had recorded this event. It is writ- ten in the Moabite dialect, which differs only slightly from Hebrew, with the ancient Hebrew character, the so-called Samaritan or Phoenician, and it is the oldest Semitic monument known. The stone, badly dam- aged, is now in the Louvre at Paris.




    Mesopotamia (Hebr. between the rivers). — TheGreeknameof the tract lyingbetween the Euphrates and Tigris, called by the He- brews Aram-naharaim {Syria of the two rivers). It extended from Mount Taurus to the Persian Gulf, and was about 800 miles long and 360 miles broad. Its plains, once fertile, are now barren for lack of ir- rigation. It was the home of the Patri- archs who preceded Abraham, and of the wives of Isaac and Jacob. When the Am- inonites were at war with David, they hired chariots and horsemen from Mesopotamia. The country furnished a delegation of Jews and proselytes to attend the Passover at Jerusalem (Acts ii. 9).

    Mesraim or Misraim. — Name given to Egypt in the Bible.

    Mesrop (St.). — Apostle of Armenia. Trained from his youth in Greek literature, became secretary first to the Armenian patriarch, Nerses the Great, and after- ward to King Weramshapuh. He re- nounced the pleasures of the royal court and retired to a monastery, where he led a very strict ascetical life and attained to an eminent degree of Christian knowledge and perfection. In order to widen the circle of his influence, he left his solitude and founded schools for the education of youth. He traversed Greater and Lesser Armenia, and other neighboring provinces in company with some of his disciples, with a view to stamp out the remains of paganism, to extirpate and preventheresy, to diffuse Christian knowledge, and to further the monastic life. He invented the Arme- nian alphabet and translated, with the help of other learned men, the Bible into that language (408-410). His great services to the Church and his country earned for him the title of the " Apostle of Armenia." He died in the odor of sanctity in 441.

    Besides his translation of the Bible, he composed penitential hymns for Lent, as well as a number of simple, popular ex- hortations, redolent with Gosple flavor; these discourses were formely ascribed to St. Gregory Illuminator. In his literary labors, Mesrop looked to the subject-matter rather than to the style and form, so that, while his homilies abound in deep thoughts and impressive admonitions, the style is monotonous and commonplace.

    Messalians or Massalians. See Eu-


    Messias (from the Hebr. niesha, to anoint). — The Christ promised by God in the Old Testament. The Redeemer of mankind promised since the beginning of the world and whom God sent upon earth after having announced Him through His prophets. The Messias, who is Jesus Christ, had been promised to our first parents immediately after their fall, when God said to the serpent that He would put enmity between him and the woman, be- tween his seed and her seed, and that the woman, or, according to the Hebrew text, the Son of the woman would crush his head (Gen. iii.). The same promise was renewed to Abraham in more express terms, with the assurance that all the na- tions would be blessed in his seed, that the Messias, the Saviour would go forth from it, and, particularly, from the tribe of Juda (xvi., xxviii., xlix.). Finally, the Messias has been announced during four thousand years by a long series of prophets. The Messias has always been the object of the most ardent desires of the holy patriarchs. Most of them had been destined by God to represent some particular trait of his life and ministry. Melchisadech prefigured His priesthood, Abraham His quality as chief and father of the Faithful, Isaac His sacrifice. Job His persecutions, Josue His triumphant entry into the land of the liv- ing, etc. The entire Jewish nation ex- pected the rise of a great king in the tribe of Juda. Although the Messias arrived eighteen hundred years ago, in the person of Jesus Christ, the Jews, dispersed all over the world for having disowned and putting Him to death, are still longing for the Messias.

    Methodism. — Anglican sect. John Wes- ley, an Anglican clergyman, is the recog- nized founder and legislator of Methodism. While a student at Oxford, he formed, with his brother Charles and a few other scholars, among whom the eloquent White- field soon became eminent, a little society for their mutual edification as well as for their literary improvment. In their meet- ings, the members of the association read, besides the classical authors, including, among other Catholic books, the Imitation of Christ. From the strict observance of a pious method, or rule of life, the associa- tion obtained the name of Methodists, which afterwards remained attached to them. Such was the beginning of a reli- gious movement which, taking its rise in

    Methodist Church


    Methodist Church

    1734, extended itself into all parts of Eng- land and Wales, made some progress in Scotland, and crossed the ocean into the New World. Retaining the liturgy and constitution of the Anglican Church, Wes- ley and his associates, at first, propagated only their religious practices, their hours of prayer and Bible reading, and their fasts and frequent communions. The energy and enthusiasm with which they preached attracted everywhere great crowds. En- couraged by their success, they began preaching in public places and open fields. In 1774, Methodism claimed already 30,000 members. From the Herrnhuters, with whom he had become acquainted, Wesley adopted the doctrine that " the remission of sin and the presence of divine grace in the soul is accompanied by a heavenly in- ward peace, manifesting itself externally in exalted bodily excitement, such as con- vulsive fits." Attacks of this kind were called " outward signs of grace," and were held to be miraculous. The preaching of Whitefield was especially successful in bringing about sudden conversion, which were usually accompanied with such con- vulsive attacks. Wesley at first disavowed all intention of separating from the Angli- can Church and maintained the necessity of loyalty to that Establishment and of her orders for lawful preaching and ministry. Subsequently, however, he satisfied him- self that bishops and presbyters, were one and the same order in the Church of Christ and consequently had the same right to ordain. He accordingly assumed episco- pal character and conferred orders and even consecrated bishops.

    A pretended Greek bishop, called Eras- mus, then residing in England, was also solicited to impart holy orders. The sep- aration of the Methodists from the Angli- can Church was thus formerly established. During the war of the Revolution the Methodist societies in America were left almost wholly without ministers ; the lat- ter siding with England against the Col- onies, had gone into British dominion. Wesley addressed a pamphlet to the Ameri- cans condemning their conduct and taking sides with the English cabinet. " No government under heaven," said he, "is so despotic as the republican; no subjects are governed in so arbitrary a manner as those of a commonwealth." After the war was over, Wesley proceeded to organize an independent "Methodist Church in America. He ordained Dr. Coke and Mr.

    Francis superintendents, or bishops, in 1783, and sent them to ordain elders in the New World. He also prepared a liturgy, differing little from that of the Church of England. The Methodist Episcopal Church in America was thus created with bishops, presbyters, and deacons, a liturgy, and a creed. The Articles of Religion which Wesley prepared for his Methodist societies are substantially an abridgment of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Church. In abridging the Articles, some were changed others were wholly omitted. Wesley and Whitefield could not agree on the questions of predestination and grace. The latter was a partisan of the most rigid predestinarianism, which Wesley, who was more inclined to Arminianism, classed among the most abominable opinions that had ever sprung up in a human head. The doctrinal difference between the two was the cause of their separation. White- field organized what is known as the Cal- vinistic Churchy while the partisans of Wes- ley were called after him Wesleyans or Wesleyan Methodists. From these parties again many secessions followed, so that there is quite a number of denominations that adhere more or less to the doctrinal principles of Wesley or Whitefield.

    Methodist Church in the United States.

    — There are a number of branches thereof. The "Methodist Episcopal Church" is the oldest and largest Methodist Church in the United States. From 1766, when the first society was formed in New York city, to 1773, when the first conference was held in Philadelphia, the Churches were scattered organizations in New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and other States; and the preachers were itinerants, nearly all of English descent. According to the official records the growth of this Church for the past one hundred years is as fol- lows : In 1796 there were 293 preachers and 56,664 members. At the beginning of 1896 there were 140 annual organizations; 31,- 922 ministers and local preachers ; 2,766,656 members and probationers ; 30,264 Sun- day schools, having 344,844 officers and teachers, and 2,580,973 scholars; 25,384 parsonages, valued at .$16,649,392. For benevolent society purposes there was contributed, in 1895, $2,105,020; for min- isterial support, $10,385,948; for buildings and improvements, $4,379,307 ; and for cur- rent expenses, $3,680,698. The number of theological institutions, colleges and uni-




    versities, classical seminaries, foreign mis- sion schools, Bible training schools, etc., in 1895, controlled wholly or in part by this Church, was 219, the value of whose grounds and buildings was $14,644,525, the number of professors and teachers 2,792, and the number of students 43,320.

    The Methodist Episcopal Church South. — The Methodist Episcopal Church be- came divided on the question of slavery in 1844. May ist, 1845, the slaveholding conferences met in Louisville, Kentucky, and organized the Methodist Episcopal Church South. By official reports in 1895 this church has 5,868 traveling and 6,724 local preachers ; the white members num- ber 1 ,382,765, and colored and Indian, 5,058 ; Sunday schools, 13,873, teachers, 99,338, scholars, 811,579; church edifices, 13,581, value, $21,093,918 ; parsonages, 3,282, value, $3,780,149; contributions for foreign mis- sions, $215,815, domestic missions, $130,919, total, $347,654 ; appropriations for presid- ing elders, $281,080, for preachers in charge, $2,019,551, for bishops, $36,843 ; chapters of Epworth League, 1,950, members, 87,750.

    African Methodist Church. — Total itin- erant ministers, local preachers, and ex- horters, 20,250; total of members, 599,141 ; church edifices, 4,575; value, $8,650,155; universities, colleges, and schools, 41 ; value, $756,475; expense (1894-1895) for preachers, publication, church extension, Sunday schools, missions, etc., $1,370,127; for education, professors and teachers, books, etc., $978,870.

    African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church. — Traveling and local preachers and exhorters, 2,397; membership, 394,- 562; Sunday schools, 2,175; officers and teachers, 13,145; scholars, 108,820; church edifices, 1,605 ! value of church property and parsonages, $3,019,084.

    African Union Methodist Protestant Church. — Traveling and local preachers, 1,550; total membership, 7,000; Sunday schools, 350; officers and teachers, 900; scholars, 2,770; church edifices, 700; value of church property, $60,000.

    Colored Methodist Episcopal Church in America. — Traveling and local preachers, 4,083; membership, 7,098; scholars, 79,876; church edifices, 4,004 ; schools, 6 ; students, 907 ; value of school prop>erty, $98,000.

    Congregational Methodist. — M ember- ship, 12,500; ministers, 204; church edi- fices, 238.

    Congregational Methodist (Colored). — Ministers, 5 ; churches, 5 ; members, 319.

    Evangelist Mission . — M i n i s t e r s and local preachers, 114; membership, 4,600; churches, 13 ; Sunday school scholars, 1,200; value of church property, $25,000.

    Eree Alethodist. — Traveling and local preachers, 1,660; members (1894), 26,140; Sunday schools, 942 ; scholars, 32,552 ; value of church property, $1,069,074.

    Independent Methodist. — Ministers, 8; churches, 15 ; members, 2,569.

    Methodist Protestant. — Ministers and local preachers, 1,965; membership, 166,- 032; churches, 2,042; parsonages, 460; value of churches and parsonages, $4,602,- 243; Sunday schools, 1,844; officers and teachers, 16,235; scholars, 105^314; pas- tors' salaries, $296,974.

    Neiv Congregational Methodist. — Churches, 35; membership, 1,200; Sun- day schools, 25 ; value of church property, $5,000.

    Primitive Methodist. — Traveling and local preachers, 208; members, 6,340; Sunday schools, 108; scholars, 11,750; churches, 100; parsonages, 41; value of property, $416,143.

    Union American Methodist Episcopal. — Ministers, 115; churches, 115; communi- cants, 7,031.

    Weslevan Methodist. — Membership, 18,141; Sunday schools, 465; scholars, 18,344; value of church property, includ- ing churches, parsonages, and publishing house, $580,472.

    Zion Union Apostolic. — Ministers, 30; churches, 32 ; communicants, 2,346.

    The latest revised returns for all the re- ligious denominations of the United States for 1895 show a grand total of 125,503 min- isters, of which the Methodists had 32,369, or more than 25 per cent. ; grand total number of churches, 178,754, Methodist 53,537, or nearly 30 per cent. ; grand total of communicants, 23,614,443, Methodist 5,124,636, or more than 21 per cent. With the exception of the Catholic Church, which counts about 12,000,000 members, the Methodist denominations of the United States outrank any other in number of churches, ministers, and communicants.

    Methodius(surnamed "The Confessor"). — Patriarch of Constantinople, born at Syracuse, died in 846. By the suavity of his manners, he converted many icono- clasts to the Catholic doctrine.

    Methodius (St.). — Bishop of Olympus. The particulars of his life are unknown. He was one of the many opponents of




    Origen, both during his lifetime and after his death. He is described by contempo- rary writers as a man of great penetration of mind, of high education, and profound learning. He died the death of a martyr under Maximus Daja, in the Diocletian persecution, about 312. Methodius has left several works, in which he defends celibacy, opposes the errors of Origen, impugns heathenism, and comments upon the texts of Holy Scripture. Chief of his works, still preserved in the original text, is the Convivitim decern Virginum,sive de virginitate.

    Methodius (St.). See Cyril and Methodius.

    Metrophanes. — Greek theologian and prelate of the ninth century. One of the most ardent adversaries of Photius, who caused him to be deposed and imprisoned. Basil I. restored him to his see of which he was again dispossessed in 879.

    Metropolitan is the bishop of a me- tropolis or chief city of a province, who presides over an entire province. Metro- politans are also named archbishops, al- though, strictly speaking, the former are those who have suffragan bishops, while the latter may not have any. Every met- ropolitan, therefore, is rightly called an archbishop ; but not every archbishop is a metropolitan. See Archbishop.

    Mexico ( The Church in) . See Missions.

    Mezzofanti (Joseph) (1774-1849). — Learned prelate and polyglot, born at Bo- logna, died in Rome. Ordained priest in 1797. He taught Greek and the Oriental languages at Bologna. He was called to Rome by Pope Gregory XVI., who cre- ated him Cardinal in 1838. He was a phe- nomenal linguist, speaking over 50 divers tongues, and having some acquaintance with as many more.

    Michael (St.) {Michael, i.e.,ivho is like to God). — The Prophet David calls the holy angel Michael " the prince of the an- gels " (x. 13) ; and the Apostle Judas Thad- deus names him an archangel, and John, in the Apocalypse, describes the contest between him and Lucifer, in which St. Michael drove the latter out of heaven. Several miraculous visions of this holy archangel on Mount Gargano in Italy and at Tuba in France, and many wonderful graces which God granted through his in- tercession, gave special occasion, in the

    sixth and seventh centuries, to his public veneration and to the institution of festi- vals in his honor. F. Sept. 29th.

    Michael Cerularius. See Cerularivs.

    Micheas.— I. Micheas the Ancient. — Jew- ish Prophet ; announced to Josaphat, king of Juda, that his ally Achab would perish in his expedition against the Syrians. In punishment for a prophecy that was so contrary to him, Achab imprisoned him. 2. Micheas the Younger (740-690 B.C. ) — Born at Morasthi (Juda). One of the twelve minor Prophets. He has left a book divided into seven chapters, in which he announces the captivity of the Jews and the coming of a Saviour of the world.

    Michol. — Daughter of Saul, wife of David, whose life she saved, but having beheld him dancing before the Ark, she sneered at him and in punishment thereof became barren.

    Miletus. — An ancient city, capital of Ionia, 36 miles south of Ephesus, at the mouth of the Maeander ; the parent of many colonies. St. Paul on his return from the third tour stopped here ( Acts xx.) and re- visited the place with Trophimus ( II. Tim. iv. 20).

    Millennium. — An opinion has in all ages been widely spread among Christians that before the consummation of the world, a considerable period is to elapse during which the Church on earth will enjoy great prosperity. A thousand years is generally assigned for the duration of this period, which circumstance has led to the follow- ers of the opinion being called Chiliasts or Millennarians, the Greek and Latin words signifying Thousand Tear Men. The main foundation for the opinion is read in the Apocalypse ( xx. 4, 5), and the passage certainly seems at first sight to be sufficiently clear. But we know how much obscurity there is in almost all prophecy, and assuredly the Apocalypse is no excep- tion to the rule : there is scarcely a single prophetical passage in this book concern- ing the meaning of which there is agree- ment. In particular, the upholders of the Millennium differ most widely among themselves as to the details and order of the events and the result of their discord is that most students are convinced of the impossibility of arranging any millennial scheme which shall not clash with some points of assured doctrine. Thus some think no more is meant than that a long



    MiNucius Felix

    period of peace and prosperity awaits the Church Militant, either before or after the struggle in which Antichrist will be over- thrown ; but this view is scarcely consis- tent with the univeral declaration that all who will live godly lives in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution ( II. Tim. iii. 12). Besides which, it is far from what seems to be indicated in the Apocalypse ; and what- ever is the external state of affairs, each in- dividual man will never be free from that concupiscence, which is inherent in his ma- terial nature, and which will always be his chief spiritual enemy.

    Most Chiliastic systems assert a double resurrection, one of the just alone, the other of the rest of mankind. As to the nature of millennial happiness, some Chris- tian or half-Christian sects of ancient times did not hesitate to hold out a prospect of pleasure of the lowest, most sensual kind, such as is read of in the Talmud and the Koran ; other Chiliasts talk of a personal reign of Christ on earth, but they are far from agreeing as to its nature, and in fact the subject affords scope for the freest ex- ercise of fancy. In the early days of the Church, Chiliastic notions were widely prevalent among Catholics, and it has even been maintained that they were universally held to be a part of the revealed faith. This is an exaggeration. For many years no approved Catholic writer has looked forward to a millennium, and weighty au- thorities believe that it would be heresy to do so. It is remarkable that the theory which we are considering has always found special favor among those sects which are most bitterly opposed to Rome. These delight in pointing out that the woman who sits on seven hills (Apoc. xvii. 11) is the city called Babylon (xiv. 8; xviii. 2), which is the seat of wickedness and doomed to fall ; they quote correctly from the Fathers to show that this city is no other than Rome ; whence they conclude that the downfall of the Papacy is declared by prophecy. They are wrong, for they fail to observe that the Rome of the Fathers was the pagan power which was to tread down the Holy City for a while (Apoc. xi. 2), and shed the blood of the saints (xvi. 6).

    Milner (Johk) (1752-1826). — English Catholic writer, born at London. Priest, pastor at Winchester in 1779. Bishop of Castabala and vicar apostolic of the Mid- land district in 1803. Author of the well- known End of Controversy.

    Miltiades (St.). — Pope from 311 to 314. Born in Africa, presided over the Council of Rome (313) and condemned the Dona- tists. F. Dec. loth.

    Miltiades. — Apologist. Miltiades whom Tertullian calls *^ Sophista ecc/esiarutn," i.e., "Advocate of the Christians," com- posed, besides controversial works against the heathen, Jews and Montanists, a sepa- rate treatise in defense of the divinity of Christ, and a Christian Apologv addressed to the civil power. From the few frag- ments preserved by Eusebius we may dis- cern the ability of the entire composition, as well as the other writings of the author. St. Jerome says of him : " Serif sit et con- tra gentes volumen egregium . . . ut nescias, quid in illo primu/n mirari debeas, eruditionem sceculi, an scieniiam Scriptur- arum" {Epist. 70 ad Magnum).

    Minims. — This name is commonly given to the religious of the order of Minim-Her- mits, founded by St. Francis of Paola, about the year 1436. The rule of this order surpasses in austerity, even that of the Minorites, or Franciscans ; to the usual three monastic vows, St. Francis added as a fourth, perpetual Lent and ab- stinence, not only from meat, but also from eggs and milk. In 1473, Pope Sixtus IV. gave his sanction to the new congregation, and named Francis its first superior general. In 1495, Pope Alexander VI. formally confirmed the community as a mendi- cant order under the title of " Minim- Hermits," giving it all the privileges possessed by the Mendicant Friars. Not- withstanding its extreme severity, the order spread rapidly through Italy, France, and Spain ; within a few years it numbered four hundred and fifty convents for men, and fourteen for women. St Francis, who died in 1507, was canonized in 1519 by Leo X.

    Minor Orders. See Orders.

    Minucius Felix. — A Latin apologist. Nothing certain is known of him, but that he was a distinguished causidicus, or ad- vocate in Rome, which occupation he pursued after his conversion to Christian- ity. He was a native of Africa, some say of Asia, and flourished in the first half of the third century. His apology entitled Octavius is a dialogue demonstrating the existence of one God only, and defending the Christians from calumnies then in cir- culation against them. St. Jerome men-




    tions another work, now lost, entitled De Fato vel Contra Mathematicos, which was at the time ascribed to Minucius.

    Miracle. — A miracle is an act of divine power, contrary to the known laws of nature. According to Rationalists, no doctrine has the right to impose itself upon the human mind as revealed or as inspired by God, since there is none that has been confirmed by the authority of real miracles. The basis of this system is, then, the absence of miracles. " If mira- cles have some reality," says Renan, " our method is detestable, and my book is but a tissue of errors."

    The consequences of these principles in regard to Holy Scripture, especially the New Testament, are manifest. Not only does the Sacred Scripture contain no real miracle ; but in truth there is no Holy Scripture or Inspired Book. " Inspira- tion," says the same writer, "implying a miracle, cannot be maintained." The Bible is only a book of human origin, wherein the true is mingled with the false, and prudence and judgment are re- quired to prevent our being deceived therewith.

    It is true that all Rationalists do not ex- press their views in such a clear manner. A great number of them continue to speak of the Bible as of divine origin, and quote its teachings as the word of God ; but this they do through habit or on account of their official position, as many of those who occupy themselves with Holy Scrip- ture are ministers of the Gospel or profes- sors of Christian theology, and cannot act or talk otherwise without great personal inconvenience. This inconsistency does not prevent them from inculcating their doctrine, teaching that Scripture is in it- self truth, but truthful under conditions and which it does not shock what they term a " reasonable sense," or does not compel the mind or conscience to adhere to it. By means of this cunning shift they manage to avoid the scandal of a radical negation, and to eliminate as fabulous all truths which require an act of faith or the subjec- tion of man to God's teaching.

    Wherein does the fault of this system lie, and in what does it consist.? This is to be seen at its starting point. It consists in affirming gratuitously, and in asking us to accept without proof, that which requires demonstration, namely: that nothing supernatural ever took place, and that all

    so-called miracles, however much accred- ited, must be regarded as illusions and im- postures.

    No one has the right to set up as an ax- iom, or as an intuitive truth a principle opposed to the common opinion of the most enlightened and most sincere men of all times and places. Such, however, is the pretense of the Rationalists in regard to miracles. In vain may we ask for proofs of their principle, or look for them in their writings. From neither do we receive any satisfaction. They will deny or combat according to the occasion such or such a miracle; but the reality or the possibility of miracles in general they always abstain from attacking, alleging that this would be a useless task; and instead of establish- ing their principle, they limit themselves to a repetition, in various ways, of their unproved and improbable assertions as if such were indisputable, unquestionable, and universally accepted truths.

    " Miracles," they boldly assert, " do not belong to history, but to legendary lore. To accept a miracle is to accept an expla- nation which has no scientific basis. The entire negation of the supernatural is the very essence of their criticism. No one has the science or knowledge of history as long as he does not acknowledge the im- possibility of miracles Every account, according to the opponents of miracles, connected with a supernatural element necessarily implies credulity or imposture. The existence of miracles is impossible to maintain in the presence of received ideas of good, modern sense. The negation of the supernatural has become for every cul- tivated mind an absolute dogma."

    Such assertions, although repeated with so much assurance, do not form any proof. That there are to-day more or less infidels among the literary and cultivated classes is not here questioned. Right does not depend on numbers ; moreover, even here, numbers are lacking. To the empty ne- gation and dismal doubts of the Rational- ists, we can triumphantly and truthfully oppose the unvarying belief of all the Faithful, that of the converts of all times, many of whom were giants of intellect and sanctity, and especially the tried faith of the early Christians, who died, not for a fable or an opinion, but in attestation of se- rious and solemn faith. Most undoubtedly, these faithful Christians, martyrs, confes- sors, converts, and doctors, believed in the Gospel, in its miracles, especially the resur-




    rection of the Saviour. No one can ques- tion the sincerity of their conviction ; in this they are above all suspicion. And as to the intelligence or mental power of these hosts of witnesses, who has the right to place it below that of infidels and skeptics? Are the latter the only enlightened ones, or alone worthy of belief.? The first Chris- tians lived with Jesus Christ and His Apos- tles. What was wanting to them that they should not be proper witnesses to the truth of facts which came under their own per- sonal observation ? Did they not see and hear, or had they any self-interest to influ- ence them to be deceived ? Those who came after them had not less decisive rea- sons in order to believe. To speak only of those motives which were alike, com- mon to all, did they not witness in the fulfillment of the prophecies, in the estab- lishment of the Church, in the dispersion of the Jews and the conversion of the Gen- tiles, incontestable miracles enounced long before.? Finally, in all epochs and in all countries, even in our own times, we find not only sensible, learned, and virtuous men who believe in miracles and prophe- cies, but we can name a large number who testify to having witnessed such miracles and who saw the fulfillment of prophecies, and who, if needs be, can testify that such miracles were effected by the power of God. Moreover, those who can thus tes- tify are such as are deserving of the high- est esteem and who enjoy the greatest confidence of all who know them. Ration- alists cannot convince us that these men were deceived, or that these facts do not come under the law of science or credibil- ity. They simply assert that these facts are contrary to the usages of historic criti- cism as understood and professed by them- selves.

    This would be sufficient to show our ad- versaries that the impossibility of miracles is not a first principle, or self-evident truth, as they boldly assert. But there is yet stronger proof to invalidate their as- sumptions, namely, the reality of miracles as such. Indeed the existence and cer- tainty of miracles have always been and are still held as unquestionable by all minds that have not repudiated the clearest demonstrations of science and reason.

    What do we really understand by a mir- acle? It is a fact which is above and be- yond the laws of nature, which is produced or effected outside of them by an action or power which these natural laws are unable

    to account for. But are there not thou- sands of facts of this kind, whose reality nature attests, and whose existence and character learned men point out?

    1. The creation of the world is a living, present fact. It exists and is before us. When did it begin to exist? To whom does it owe its existence? Not to the laws of nature, which are subsequent to it, but to an action which is above and bevond them, to the action of an Almighty Will, in other words, to a miracle.

    2. The production of life upon earth. All savants acknowledge that at a certain epoch the earth was only a mineral mass, from which all life was absent. They are also agreed that according to the laws of nature a living being can only come from another living being. How, then, did life appear upon earth, if not by a miraculous intervention ?

    3. The different vegetable and animal species. Science equally attests that these species are irreducible, and that when in- di\-iduals come from individuals, the species cannot arise from other species. There- fore, the first individual of each species, the first man, the first woman, must have been created, brought forth from nothing by a miracle.

    We do not mean to affirm the absolute immutability of species. It is known that under certain conditions and circum- stances, or influences, they produce varie- ties and races. Neither do we assert that all the species admitted by scientists are real or primitive species ; but we do as- sert, and natural science agrees with us, that there always have been in the animal order as well as in the vegetable order, di- versity of species, or that all species never could and never can be identical with any single, particular one. Hence they could have been produced only in a miraculous manner. We have before our eyes as many sensible proofs of the reality of mi- raculous actions as we behold in nature different species of animals or vegetables.

    Thus in the physical order as in the spiritual order, much of what we see is based on miracle. Far from the possibility of a miracle being a scientific dogma of men of good sense ; the reality, certainty, and indefinite number of miraculous facts are to-day a dogma of truth professed by scientists. All nature is, as it were, an ever present miracle, implying and revealing an infinity of others. Perhaps it may be said that there is no question about the




    origin of things; that Rationalists only deny the continuation of miracles in na- ture, as such admission would be deroga- tory to the laws of nature, established by the Creator, But this mode of reasoning has no force although seemingly well founded, for all its force of argument rests on human reason making this fallible rea- son the judge and superior of that which is beyond and above reason. For, evidently, it is not contrary to reason to believe that what God did in the beginning. He can do again in the course of time, and no one can rightfully refuse or deny this to Him. Having formed the material world in a miraculous manner, why could He not likewise form the spiritual world .? When He, the Almighty, wrought an infinity of miracles in order to spread throughout na- ture, with a bounteous hand, both life and movement, why could He not also work a certain number of miracles in the Church, His spiritual kingdom, in order that faith and sanctity might flourish therein ? When He could create at will, independently of all rule, in the beginning of time in order to manifest His existence, goodness, lib- erty, and essential perfections, why could He not act in the same manner, later on? Why should He not in our time still do so, in order to show forth His essential liberty, to make known His designs, to reveal His blessed will, to move His rational crea- tures to know and serve Him ? Finally, is it reasonable to deny His free action of power when plainly revealing itself to us in the physical order, as well as when the same almighty power reveals itself in the spiritual order by the less palpable evi- dence of certainty?

    Therefore, the Christain principle of ad- mitting miracles is not contrary to right reason, but in reality the negation of this admission, as rationalism does, is plainly contrary to the dictates of reason. Noth- ing, indeed, is more contrary to a rational mind, than to refuse the free action of God in the formation of the world, or to be un- willing to admit His free action of infinite power, exercised in a miraculous manner, in the establishment and government of His Church.

    Miriam. — Sister of Moses and eldest of the family. She is first mentioned as watching her brother's cradle in the sedges by the river's brink. After the crossing of the Red Sea she becomes "Miriam the Prophetess " ; takes the lead with Aaron,

    in the complaint against Moses for his marriage with a Cushite, and for this was stricken with leprosy. This curse was re- moved, and she died toward the close of the wandering in the desert, being buried at Cadesh.

    Missal. — An appellation given to the volume which contains the liturgy of the Mass, together with the whole order of divine service to be celebrated on Sundays, festivals, and saints' days throughout the year. The different Masses of the year were collected for the first time in the fourth century by Pope Gelasius. The collection, entitled Sacramentary was later on revised by Pope Gregory the Great. It had for the offices four different books : the Gospels, the Sacramentary or Bishop's Missal and Priest's Missal, the Lectionary or Epistolary and Antiphonary. The "Full Missals " contained all the books. Several bishops caused particular missals to be drawn up. Each religious order had also its own missal, with the office of its saints.

    Mission(charge,power given to a specified agent to go and accomplish ^ome particular undertaking). — Applies itself collectively to priests, secular or regular, employed in some countries, either for the conversion of infidels, or for the inst'ruction of Chris- tians. Series of sermons, catechetical in- structions, conferences which missionaries make in some place, either for the conver- sion of infidels and heretics, or for the in- struction of Christians. Priests of the Foreign Missions. Secular priests who live in community under a superior general, and whose object is to preach the Gospel.

    Missions and Missionary Institutes. — Obedient to the injunction of our Lord to preach the Gospel to all nations and to every creature, the Catholic Church has in all ages sent her missionaries into every part of the inhabited globe. Since the rise of Protestantism, and notably since the defection of the great maritime powers from the Church, two classes of mission- aries have unhappily come face to face in nearly every country of the world, mutu- ally opposed to each other, and the one not unfrequently undoing the work of the other. But, in the face of every obstacle, the Catholic religion has gone steadily forward, gaining triumph after triumph, until at last there is not a corner of the earth in which its teachings are not pro- claimed and professed. In the present




    century the glorious field of missionary work, in which the great St. Francis Xavier was the first to labor in modern times, has been cultivated with encourag- ing success.

    Catholic missions may be conveniently distributed into the following five geograph- ical divisions: i. The Eastern Missions, comprising the Crimean Peninsula, the Grecian Archipelago, Constantinople, Syria, Armenia, Persia, Arabia, Egypt, Nubia, and Abyssinia. 2. The India Mis- sions, extending as far as the Philippine islands. 3. The Missions of China, in- cluding Siam, Cochin-China, Tung-King, and Japan. 4. The American Missions, which, starting at Hudson bay, include the Canadas, British America, the Indian Territory, the country along the Rocky mountains, and the Antilles, ending at Paraguay. 5. The Missions of Oceania, including Australia.

    These missions, though under the direc- tion of the Propaganda (see this word) at Rome, are mainly supported by the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, founded at Lyons in 1822 (see Confraternities) ; by the Association of the Holy Childhood of Jesus, founded at Paris in 1844 ; by the Leopoldine Association of Austria ; by the Association of King Louis of Bavaria ; and by the St. Francis Xavier Association, in the archdiocese of Cologne. There is also a number of institutions in the Roman Catholic Church especially devoted to the work of training missionaries, as, for ex- ample, the College of the Propaganda at Rome, the most famous missionary estab- lishment in the world; the Hungarian- Germanic College; the Greek College; the English College ; the Scotch College ; the Irish College ; the College of St. Peter in Montorio ; the College of St. Bartholo- mew ; the College of St. Isidore ; the Col- lege of St. Anthony of Padua ; the College of the Capuchins; the College of St. Greg- ory, the '* Illuminator " for the Armenias. The Mechitarists, the Maronites of Libanon, the Abyssinians, and Copts, also have mis- sionary institutions at Rome. Outside of Rome we may mention : the Greek Semi- nary at Palermo ; the College of the Greeks of St. Benedict at Ullano; the Chinese College at Naples ; the Seminary for the Missions of Central Africa at Verona ; the College of All-Hallows, near Dublin, Ire- land ; St. Joseph's College at Mill Hill, near London, England, exclusively devoted to missionary work among the negroes ; the

    Illyrain College at Loretto ; the Swiss Col- lege at Milan ; the Seminary of Louvain, Belgium ; the Seminary of the Marists at Lyons, France; the College of Melun, France ; the Seminary of Foreign Missions ; the Seminary of the Holy Ghost and the Irish Seminary, in Paris; and the Semi- nary of St. Charles at Buenos Ayres. This list is not absolutely complete, but indicates the principal missionary establishments, and sufficiently proves the prodigious ex- tent of the Catholic missions all over the globe. The missionaries are ^e advance- guard of the explorers and the pioneers of civilization. The Edifying Letters, and the Annals of the Propagation of the Faith, furnish the best elementary accounts of geographical science.

    Missions {Protestant). — Only since the niaeteenth century has it entered the minds of Protestants to apply themselves, in a larger measure, to the conversion of infidels. It was not the government of Protestant countries that first interested themselves in the conversion of pagans — England even favored idolatry in East India — but private societies. The most active among them were the Lutherans, then the Anglicans, and especially the Methodists. But, here again, controver- sies were not wanting among the different sects. Since 1846, societies of German missions have united themselves into peri- odic assembles in different localities. The married missionaries, obliged to care for their wives and children, smitten often with the passion of gain, generally showed themselves much below their task, and their success was not proportionate to the immense sums expended. Catholic mis- sionaries, with very inadequate resources, obtained quite diflFerent results, and several Protestants have openly admitted the ste- rility and ill success of Protestant missions. Neophytes, often gained through presents, showed little perseverance.

    Protestants tried, especially, to act through Bible societies. A corporation formed itself in London in 1804, under the name of Britannic and Foreign Bible So- ciety, and was definitely constituted on March 7th, 1805. Its end was to spread among all the nations and in the different languages, either for a nominal sum, or gratuitously, the text of the Bible without any explanation. In 1844, it counted al- ready 7,000 branch establishments ; it diS' tributed sixteen millions of Bibles during




    forty years. Translations, of which some were very defective, were made in nearly two hundred languages. A great Bible Society was also created in Berlin in 1814; another in 1818 in the United States. The success, if compared with this immense display of resources, was extremely mea- ger. A great many countries made use of the Bibles, which they received as a pres- ent, for all kinds of purposes, and conver- sions were very rare. As they spread, also, among the Catholics, falsified and muti- lated translations of the Bible ; and as these translations were recommended by polem- ical treatises which they distributed, the Holy See had necessarily to condemn these Bible Societies and their work, and warn the Faithful against the seduction.

    Many Protestant missionaries have chosen Catholic countries for the sphere of their labors. Before all they try to "evangelize" Italy. Since 1870, Protes- tants have been permitted to erect public houses of worship in Rome itself; they were favored by the government, while the religion acknowledged by the State, had not the liberty of its movements. Also, in Spain and Portugal, they endeavor to convert Catholics to Protestantism. But so far their labors have remained fruitless.

    Missions in India, China, Japan, Africa, and Oceania. — The apostolic labors of the missionaries among the heathen were blessed with remarkable success. Of all the religious orders, none played a more heroic or zealous part than the Society of Jesus. After the suppression of the Society the missionary work was carried on with great energy by the Seminary of Paris, es- tablished for foreign missions in 1663. St. Francis Xavier (died in 1552), became the "Apostle" of the Hindoos. The disinter- ested zeal of this saint knew no bounds, and soon gained favor, even with the most dissolute men. Walking through the streets he carried a little bell by means of which he called the people to his instruc- tions. God assisted him in his great work by granting him the gift of miracles and of languages. So great was the number of those desiring baptism, that the saint's arms became lame from the exertion ac- companying the administration of the sacrament. In the Portuguese Indies, es- pecially in Goa, Francis labored with wonderful success, and though at the same time he suffered great physical pain and agony, his only utterance was ^^Amplius!"

    {still more). Francis desired to carry the light of faith to China, but he died on the way to the island of San Chan, in the sight of the mainland.

    During his missionary labors he bap- tized with his own hands more than 1,000,- 000 heathens. His work was continued by other Jesuits. Difficulties having arisen from the Hindoo castes, it became neces- sary to appoint special missionaries for nobles and the pariahs or lowest classes. In the nineteenth century the Society of Lyons has done much to rekindle the faith in India. Of late years the missions have been carried on with considerable success. There are more than 1,000,000 Catholics in British India and Siam. Flourishing congregations were founded by the Jesuits in Tonquin and Cochin-China, which con- tinue to exist, despite the violent persecu- tions that took place in after years. The Jesuits also succeeded in entering the Chinese empire. Among the missionaries who went to China, were Father Ricci, who made watches, maps, etc., and Father Schall, a distinguished astronomer. By their literary and scientific abilities, these men gained such consideration with the emperor that they began to preach the Gospel, converting many of the lower classes and even some of the princes. Catholic churches were erected in Peking (1606) and Nanking (1611). Persecutions broke out at various times, but fortunately, they were of short duration.

    In 1692 the penal laws against the Chris- tians were abolished and the missionaries were authorized by law to preach the Gos- pel. But in the eighteenth century, fierce persecutions were carried on ; many Chris- tians suffered martyrdom, among them be- ing several relatives of the emperor. In 1855 a treaty was effected by which Chris- tian missionaries were freely permitted to enter the empire. The Society of the Holy Childhood, established in France (1843), has done a great deal of good for the Faithful in China.

    The first labors of the missionaries in Japan proved very successful, and more than 200,000 heathens entered the Church. But as early as 1587, a cruel persecution broke out, during which many Christians suffered martyrdom. A persecution, still more severe followed in 1612. The Dutch traders, being jealous of the Spanish com- merce, accused the Japanese Christians of being in conspiracy with the Portuguese against the life of the emperor. In conse-




    quence of this accusation all foreigners were forbidden to enter Japan ; the Dutch, alone, could carry on the trade if they were willing to trample the crucifix under their feet and renounce the faith. They bombarded the fortress Simabara, which sheltered 30,000 Japanese Christians, all of whom perished. Among the martyrs were 150 Jesuits. In 1649 Christianity seemed to have died out, but it lived in secret; prayers and baptisms were handed down from generation to generation until the present day. The Christians are still exposed to the oppressions and persecu- tions of the imperial officers.

    Christianity spread rapidly in the Por- tuguese settlement of Africa. The labors of the missionaries were rendered very dif- ficult by the unhealthy climate and the barbarous manners of the natives. Through the influence of Cardinal Lavigerie the African missions have received a fresh im- pulse.

    On the continent of Oceania the missions are prospering. Since 1874 t^o ecclesias- tical provinces, Sidney and Melbourne, have been established in Australia. The Australian Plenary Council was held at Sidney in 1885 and presided over by his eminence, Cardinal Moran. See Aus- tralia.

    Missions in South America. See Chris- tianity IX America and Hierarchy.

    Missions {Early) in the United States and Canada. — The hostility of the Indians and the bigotry of the English colonists were the great obstacles to the spread of Christianity in the United States. The early explorers of the coast, Cabot, Ver- razzani, Gomez, were Catholics. The first missionaries to set foot on the territory now included in the United States, were Rev. John Juarez and his companions, who were brought over in the expedition of Ponce de Leon, in 15 12. They touched the shores of Florida in 1528, but most of them died the same year, either from hun- ger or from the hostility of the Indians. Father Louis Cancer, the leader of the small band of Dominicans, who came to Florida in 1549, was killed by an Indian. St. Augustine, the oldest town, and con- taining the oldest church in America, was laid out by Melandez, a Spanish admiral, in 1565. The cession of Florida by the Spanish to England, by the Treaty of Paris in 1763, destroyed the missions.

    Mark of Nice, a Franciscan, penetrated the country to New Mexico, in 1540. Father Padilla, O. S. F., who first attempted to preach the Gospel within the territory of the present diocese of Santa Fe, received a martyr's crown. Later, the missions of Santa Fe became very successful. Texas was visited in 1544 by the Spaniard Andrew de Olmos, but no permanent mission was established until 1688. As early as 1601 Mass was celebrated in California by a Franciscan, but the real apostle of the state was Father Junipero Serra, who ac- companied the expedition to Galvez, 1769. The first mission was established at San Diego. The Jesuit fathers, Salvatierra and Francis Keuhne, sowed the seed of Christianity in Old California in 1697.

    Father Segura and eight Jesuits per- ished in the present state of Maryland in 1570, through the treachery of a. young Indian. The first settlement in the state was made at St. Mary's by the Catholics in 1634. Fathers White and Altham, who accompanied these pioneers, were the first English priests on this continent. Lord Baltimore, a Catholic nobleman, was at the head of the colony. Its charter was re- markable for its liberality, granting free- dom of worship to all. The flourishing mission of Maryland was destroyed by Claybourne and his band of Puritr-.n fanat- ics, who expelled the Catholic governor and carried off priests into slavery.

    In the year 1609 the Jesuit fathers, Biard and Masse, established a mission in Maine on Neutral island, from whence it was removed in 161 2, to Mount Desert island in the present diocese of Portland.

    The English, under the command of Argall, a furious bigot, destroyed the mission in Canada about 1611. Notwith- standing the rigorous climate and the hos- tility of the Indians, they soon placed it on a permanent basis. Father Druillettes, S. J., went from Canada to convert the Abnaki of Maine, where he established a second mission in 1646. The whole Ab- naki tribe was converted to Christianity and clung to the faith amid all sorts of trials and persecutions, caused by the Eng- lish settlers of Massachusetts. The mis- sion was destroyed and the sainty Jesuit, Sebastian Rale, was barbarously mur- dered.

    Fathers Jogues and Lalande were the first missionaries in what is now known as the state of New York. They entered the territory from Quebec in 1646 to convert

    Mission Work


    Among the Indians

    the Mohawks. Both fathers were mur- dered by the Indians the same year near the present city of Schenectady. Father Brebuef, apostle of the Hurons, and his companion, Lalemant, were captured by the Iroquois and put to death. Fathers Le Moyne, Dablon, and Bressani labored among the Onondagos and Mohawks. Afterwards they were obliged to flee to Canada. The early missions of New York were broken up by the English in 1713.

    Father Jogues, w^ose name has already been mentioned, and Father Raymbault were the first to establish Christianity in the Lake country in 1641. They were succeeded by Father Menard, who at- tempted to establish a mission west of Sault Ste. Marie. Father Allouez founded a mission on the western extremity of Lake Superior in 1665. In the year 1673 the Jesuit, Father Marquette, discovered the "Great River" or "Father of Waters," and, in company with other Jesuits, ex-

    plored it as far as the mouth of the Arkan- sas, announcing the Gospel to the inhabit- ants of that territory. Marquette and Allouez preached the Gospel to the Indians. Poisson and Souel suffered martyrdom at the hands of the Natches Indians in the Mississippi valley.

    The most important mission in Canada was Quebec. The Church of that country was for the first fifty years, under the jur- isdiction of the Archbishop of Rouen, France. A see was at last established at Quebec and Francis Laval was consecrated bishop in 1675. The vast diocese embraced the whole vaHey of the St. Lawrence, of the Mississippi, and of the Great Lakes. The English government wrested Canada from France in 1673, and, though hostile to the Church at home and in the United States, it tolerated Catholicity in Canada. Bishop Laval founded a seminary in Que- bec, encouraged the missionaries, and strengthened the faith of his flock.

    Mission Work {Sfatt'stics of 1898) Among the Indians.

    Dioceses or Vicariates Apostolic

    c-5 .52 rt




    Boise City

    Brownsville. . . .


    Grand Rapids.

    Green Bay


    Indian Territory.

    La Crosse.

    Lincoln (istrep.).




    ■Oregon City

    San Francisco. . . Portland, Maine.


    Los Angeles

    South Dakota


    3,000 4,000


    1,900 2,500

    10,000 9,800

    340 5.000 3,000

    8,000 1,800

    5.000 4,000

    225 1,200

    200 2,000

    1,500 6,000 2,660


    140 2,500

    589 3,000






    105 54

    379 123


    170 26


    "140 194




    140 65 383

    160 120

    385 50

    St. Joseph

    Providence f Incarnate Word \ Ursulines

    St. Francis

    Notre Dame

    St. Francis

    St. Joseph


    Providence ("St. Francis < St. Joseph ( Mercy

    fSt. Francis 1 Notre Dame

    St. Joseph

    Mercy fSt. Francis ( Providence /St. Benedict 1 St. Francis


    St. Joseph



    S.J. O.F.M.



    O.S.B. O.F.M.


    S.J. S.J.

    * Adults and Children. 31

    Mission Work


    Among the Negroes

    Mission Work (Siaiistics of 1898) Among the Negroes.

    Dioceses or Vicariates Apostolic



    Charleston. Chicago



    Indian Territory.




    Natchitoches . St. lyouis

    New Orleans^ .


    New York. . . Philadelphia.

    Pittsburgh . . .

    Richmond . . . Savannah.. . .

    St. Augnistine. San Antonio. . Wilmington . . St. Paul








    800,000 150,000








    142,480 20,000


    150 650 250

    350 6,000

    2,061 8,000


    3.425 3.000 1.500


    1,200 300






    47 31


    76 15












    ' Mission Helpers Notre Dame Col. Oblates St. Francis Charity

    . Holy Cross

    200 210 295 94 356


    385 120


    309 180 53

    /St. Dominic \ Charity

    Incarnate Word

    f St. Benedict \ Providence

    f Charity \ Loretto

    i Nazareth I,oretto St. Francis St. Joseph ■{ Mercy

    Perpetual [ Adoration Providence Providence St. Francis Mercy Perpetual Adoration Marianites Holy Family Good Shepherd Notre Dame St. Joseph Mercv

    7(i)t I (2)+

    2 (3)t


    5 (5)t


    399 200 200 50

    Notre Dame

    f Mercy

    t St. Francis

    St. Francis

    f St. Joseph ( Holy Name

    St. Joseph Holy Ghost


    St. Joseph

    I (9)t


    ♦ The fig^ires showing the Negro Population and the number of Catholic Negroes are for the most part approximative.

    1 1. St. Joseph's Seminary, Epiphany Apostolic College, St. Francis' Academy, St. Francis' Orphan- age, St. Elizabeth's Orphanage, Convent of Mission Helpers, House of the Good Shepherd. 2. St. Francis Xavier's Infirmary. 3. St. Elizabeth's Hospital, St. Joseph's Hospital. 4. Orphanage. 5. Boys' Asylum, Girls' Asylum, Old Folks' Home, House of the Good Shepherd, Asylum for Deaf Mutes. 6. Or- phanage. 7. Orphanage, Magdalen Asylum. 8. Orphanage. 9. St. Joseph's House, Industrial School.




    Mitre. — The head-dress worn in solemn Church services by bishops, abbots, and certain other prelates of the Catholic Church. The name, as probably the orna- ment itself, is borrowed from the Orientals. The Western Mitre is a tall, tongue-shaped cap, terminating in a two-fold point, which is supposed to symbolize the " cloven tongues " in the form of which the Holy Ghost was imparted to the Apostles, and is furnished with two flaps, which fall backwards over the shoulders. Opinion is much divided as to the date at which the mitre was first introduced. From the ninth century it is found in use, although not universally; and instances are recorded in which the Popes granted permission to certain bishops to wear the mitre. The mitre as an ornament, seems to have de- scended in the earliest times, from bishop to bishop.

    Mitylene. — Capital of Lesbos, the sea- port at which St. Paul touched on his way from Greece to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 14). It was an important maritime power of the vEolian Greeks. Present population, 20,000.

    Mixed Marriages. See Marriage.

    Mizraim. See Mesraim.

    Moab. — A Semitic tribe settled at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea (the modern district of Kerah). In Genesis (xix.) Moab and Ammon are represented as descendants of Lot, and their names are explained from their incestuous origin. The Moabites appear to have been a war- like tribe, and the Israelites during their wanderings through the desert, tried to avoid any encounter with them. During the period of the Judges they opposed the Israelites until they were routed by Aod (Judg. iii.). Saul and David, whose an- cestress, Ruth, was a Moabitess, subju- gated them. After Solomon's death, Moab fell to the northern kingdom. After Achab's death. Mesa refused to pay trib- ute. They were afterwards, according to the cuneiform inscriptions, subjected to Assyria. They participated in the fall of Jerusalem, through the Babylonians. At the return from captivity, the Moabites and Ammonites tried to prevent the re- building of the walls of Jerusalem. Ac- cording to the history of Josephus, they later on became confounded with the Arabs. Moloch was the god of the Mo- abites. See Mesa.

    Mohammedanism (belief in or adherence to the teachings of Mohammed). — Before the appearance of Mohammed, paganism was the prevailing religion in Arabia. The national sanctuary was the Kaaba of Mecca, which was surrounded with 360 idols. Mohammed, born at Mecca in the year 570, was in his early youth subject to epileptic fits. His address, though devoid of any literary accomplishments, was af- fable and condescending. Having passed a long and mysterious retreat in a cave near Mecca he began to preach religion, declaring that he had received from God, through the angel Gabriel the commission to re-establish the religion of Abraham : Islam, /. e., submission to God. At first he met with great opposition. In a tumult at Mecca he was compelled to flee to Medina in 622. This event is called the Hegira or Flight and is the beginning of the era of the Musselmans. Mohammed then declared that the new religion was to be established by the sword. His disci- ples, acknowledging him as their temporal and spiritual ruler, soon began to ravage the country. They forced Medina and Arabia into subjection. Mohammed died in 632. His successors, the caliphs, con- tinued his work. Mohammedanism, being well adapted to the passions and tempera- ments of the Arabs, spread rapidly, reach- ing Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Persia, Sicily, Spain, and North Africa, where it com- pletely destroyed the once flourishing Church. In Spain, th6 Mohammedans gained a battle fought near Xeres de la Frontera (711) ; Mohammedanism received a fatal check in France in the battle near Tours and Poitiers fought in 732, under the leadership of Charles Martel. Con- stantinople was twice threatened but es- caped by means of the " Greek Fire."

    The character of Mohammed presents some striking contrasts. He was ardent and enthusiastic and had lofty aims, while at the same time he manifested a low self- ishness, duplicity and perfidy. At first he appeared to be a fanatic, but later it be- came evident that he was a lewd impostor. The doctrine of Islamism is contained in the Koran collected by Abubakir, father- in-law of Mohammed. It is a mixture of Parseism, Judaism, and Christianity. The prophet holds the unity of God : ** God is God and Mohammed is His Prophet." He denied the free will of man, taught fatalism, denied redemption, justification and grace. He promised his followers a




    sensual paradise. The precepts of Mo- hammed extend only to exterior actions. They prescribe prayer, fasting, alms, pil- grimages to Mecca, warfare with unbe- lievers, while they permit polygamy and revenge by blood. Friday was the day set apart for religious ser%ice.

    Mohler (John Adam) (1796-1838). — German Catholic theologian, born at Igersheim, Wurtemberg. Ordained priest in 1819, professor of Church History in the University of Tubingen, then in that of Munich ; dean of the Chapter of Wurz- burg. His principal work is Symbolism, or Tie Doctrinal Differences betTveen Catholics and Protestants, of which there is an English translation.

    Molinistn. — Doctrine of Louis Molina (1535-^601), a famous Spanish Jesuit, on grace. This writer held the view that God in His scientia media (the knowledge which God has of future conditionals) knows what will or would be the conduct of His free creature in every combination of cir- cumstances, and, therefore having decreed what grace He will give to a particular man on a particular occasion, He knows whether that man will use the grace or whether he vdW reject it. In cases where the man rejects the grace and sins, he has by his free rejection made the grace which was truly sufficient inefficacious; if he had freely chosen to use it, he would have made this same grace efficacious. In case the grace is rejected, God knows that there is a certain higher degree of grace which that same man in the same circumstances would have used ; why this higher degree is not given in every instance is a part of the unfathomed mystery of the inequality with which God distributes His gratuitous favors. See Grack.

    Molinos (MicHAKL of) (1640-1696). — A Spanish priest ; advocated a system of piety, which obtained the name of "Quietism." In his work entitled Spiritual Guide, Mo- linos maintained that Christian perfection consists in a state of perfect rest and quiet, in which the soul, remaining wholly pas- sive under the influence of God's Spirit, neither forms any acts nor is moved by the fear of hell or a desire for heaven. In 1685, Pope Innocent XI. condemned sixty- eight propositions of Molinos ; the author himself was confined in a convent at Rome, where, after recanting his errors, he died, reconciled to the Church.

    Monarchians. — Name given in the first and second centuries to a body of Anti- Trinitarians. While acknowledging the divinity of Christ, they denied the personal distinction of the Father and the Son. They asserted an absolute oneness or per- sonal unity of God, in support of which view they referred to the words of Christ : "I and the Father are one" (John x. 30), which they understood, not of unity in essence only, but of unity of person. This, consequently, led them to say that the Father assumed flesh in Mary, and suffered and died, whence they were also called *• Patripassians."

    Monastery (convent, abode inhabited by monks or religious in general). — The Council of Trent ordained that bishops visit the monasteries, exempt or not ex- empt, with the difference that they ought to make the visit of the exempt monas- teries, auctoritate apostolica, and that of nonexempt monasteries, auctoritate pro- pria.

    Monasticistn (That which concerns monks. Religious belonging to some or- der whose members live under one -com- mon rule, and separated from the world, like the Benedictines, Bernardins, and Carthusians). — According to the common opinion, monastic life took rise only in the third century, the epoch in which St. Ni- con, Bishop of Cyzic, suffered martyrdom with 199 monks whom he governed. Dur- ing the persecution of Decius, a great number of Christians fled into the desert, and, delighted with the solitary life, never left the desert again. Living the soli- tary life of separation from one another had already commenced in the East. About the year 270, however, many solitaries still lived near the towns in Egypt, when the fame and virtues of St. Anthony drew them further into the desert, where St. Paul of Thebes had preceded St. Anthony. Here they lived in isolated cells, occupied with meditation and prayer, under the direc- tion of St. Anthony, then of St. Ammo- nius and St. Macarius the Ancient, who founded communities of monks on tlie Ni- trian mountain and in the desert of Scete. These monastic residences soon became famous throughout the World. The desert of Sinai, the desert of Gaza, different iso- lated places of Syria, Mesopotamia, Ar- menia, and Persia, became peopled with monks. St. Pachomius, who instituted for the monks the common or cenobitic life




    and wrote a rule, had not less than 7,000 monks placed under his care. However, monastic life was hardly known or prac- ticed in the West, until toward the middle of the fourth century. About the year 550, St. Eusebius of Verceil, established a mo- nastic order in his cathedral, and St. Am- brose nourished a community of solitaries who lived near Milan. Finally, about the year 560, St. Martin came to France, after having practiced the monastic life in Italy. He built the monastery of Liguge, in the diocese of Poitiers, then that of Marmou- tiers, near the city of Tours.

    There were formerly three kinds of monks : the cenobites, the anchorites, and the sarabites. The first lived in commu- nity under a rule and under an abbot or superior; the second, also called hermits, lived alone in the deserts ; finally, the sarabites lived in cells, two or three to- gether. In the East to-day there are only cenobites and hermits, and all observe the Rule of St. Basil, whom they regard as their spiritual father. It was only toward the seventh century that the Rule of St. Benedict came into use in the monas- teries of France, Italy, and England, and the Council of Autun, held about the year 655, ordained that the monks and abbots conform themselves according to this rule. About the tenth century, the religious of St. Benedict being generally raised to clerkship and holy orders, a distinction be- gan to be made in the monasteries between two kinds of religious. One class, destined for the choir and priesthood, were called lettered or crowned clerics, because they studied and wore the clerical crown or tonsure ; and the others, employed at manual labors, were called converts, lay brothers, or nonlettered. From whatever point of view we may look upon monastic life, we cannot help acknowledging that it has rendered, and still renders, to the world extraordinary services, and that the various enemies who attack it are a prey to prejudices which cannot be justified. In the Middle Ages the monasteries were the refuge of liberty and learning.

    Monk. See Monasticism.

    Monogram (Two or more of the letters of a name or word, or of the initial of sev- eral names or words, so combined as to form or appear to form a single character). — The most ancient form of monograms >^-, is that of Christ. This monogram ^ may almost invariably be discerned upon

    the greater part of the monuments of Christian antiquity which have descended to us. Its appearance upon the marbles, mortuary tiles, and lamps extracted from the Catacombs, and exhibiting the sepul- chral inscriptions of the martyrs and early believers in the Gospel who were buried there, must be familiar to everyone who is at all conversant with Christian archae- ology. It is composed of two Greek charT acters V and D the two letters with which the name of Christ com-

    mences in Greek {Kristos). With the palm branch, it was inserted in the inscription over the tomb of Pope St. Caius, who suf- fered martyrdom during the reign of Diocle- tian, and may be observed, together with the same emblem of victory, in the sepulchral epitaphs of the martyrs Sts. Alexander and Marius, the first of whom was martyred under the Emperor Antoninus, the latter under Hadrian. The assertion of the Prot- estant Basnage, that no monogram of a date anterior to the reign of Constantine the Great could be produced from the Cata- combs, is now completely exploded. It was for sometime a favorite but totally un- founded hypothesis with several Protestant writers, that this cruciform monogram of Christ was the invention of the first Chris- tian emperor, who, by ordering it to be inscribed upon the standard called the labarum, and affixed, instead of the eagle and thunderbolts of Jove, upon the shields and helmets of the Roman legions, first gave rise to its adoption by the Faithful as a symbol of belief in Jesus.

    Monophysites (Heretics of the fifth cen- tury). — The Monophysites acknowledged in Jesus Christ only one nature, and not the divine and human natures united into one sole Person. Eutyches was the author of this doctrine. (See Eutychians.) Cited before the Council of Constantinople, in 448, he was excommunicated and deposed. Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, took his part, and, in a synod of 449, declared him restored in his sacerdotal and abbatial dignity; the synod of 449 is known in Church history under the name of " Brig- andage of Ephesus." The Letter to Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, formulated the orthodox doctrine, which was proclaimed by the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. This doctrine de- fined that there are "two natures — one divine, the other human — without mix- ture or alteration, united in one Person,




    and Hypostasis, so that Christ is not parted nor divided into two persons, but is one and the same God and Only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ." The monks of Pales- tine, to the number of more than 10,000, rejected both the doctrine of the Council of Chalcedon and the error of Eutyches, by retaining the doctrine of one nature.- The doctrine of the Monophysites also spread in Egypt, and in our day we find adherents thereof in Syria, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, on the island of Cyprus, and in Armenia. In Egypt, its followers are called " Copts." See this word.

    Monothelites (Heretics in the early Church). — The Monothelites taught that, in Christ, there were two distinct natures in the one Person of the Word ; but that the human nature was without initiative, so that all will and action came from the divine nature; the human nature yielding a merely passive concurrence ; so that the acts of Christ were in no true sense the acts of a man. This error, which was a remnant of that of Eutyches, was taught about the year 620 by Theodore, Bishop of Pharan. It was condemned by Pope John IV. and by the bishops of Africa. In 648, the Emperor Constans published another edict or formulary called "Typos," which forbade all further discussion of one or two operations and wills in Christ. While the Eastern bishops, in regard to the Em- peror's " Ecthesis," submitted to the im- perial dictation, the Western bishops, in the Lateran Synod of 649, under Pope Martin I., condemned both the Monothe- lite heresy and the two imperial edicts, the "Ecthesis" and the "Typos."

    Monseigneur. — Honorary title, equiva- lent to " My lord," given to princes, bishops, and other dignitaries of the Church or court. In the Middle Ages the title of Monseigneur was given to all the saints, by invoking them, and also to every Knight. In the year 1789 it was granted to royal princes and to bishops.

    Monstrance (also called " Ostenso- rium"). — A sacred article employed in the Church for the purpose of presenting the consecrated Host for the adoration of the people, while it is carried in proces- sion as well as when it is exposed upon the altar for benediction. We see monstrances of every shape and size. Many represent a turret bored through. They used for- merly to be of gold, gilt, or silver, sometimes

    enriched with precious stones. Nowadays, the glory at least should be of silver, and the crescent or circle, holding the sacred Host, of gilt.

    Montalembert (Charles Forbes de Tryox, de,) Count (1810-1870). — French writer and politician, son of an English colonel, who was created peer of France, and was ambassador at Stockholm ; was born in London, but educated chiefly in Paris. He became one of the followers of Lamennais, and first attracted notice by a speech in the Chamber (1831) in favor of Catholic free schools. Having visited England and the East, he became a leader of the Catholic party. His chief works are: Life of St. Elisabeth of Hungary; The Monks of the West; Vandalism and Catholicity in Art; The Free Church in a Free State. The first and second of these works are translated into English.

    Montanists. — Heretics of the second cen- tury. Their founder was a certain Mon- tanus, a native of Arabia, in Mysia. He alleged that he received divine inspiration in the frantic ecstasies to which he was subject, and announced himself as the or- gan of the Paraclete. From the words of Christ "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But the Spirit of Truth shall come and teach you all truth" (John xvi. 12-13), Monta- nus inferred that the existing revelation was not complete and ascribed to the Par- aclete the mission of bringing the Church to completion and to her full age ; while to himself he arrogated the mission of a reformer. He was joined by Priscilla and Maximilla, two women of distinction, who had the like pretended raptures, and hence- forth figured as the prophetesses of the eccentric party. Calling themselves the last prophets, Montanus and his prophet- esses announced the near approach of the end of the world, which demanded a more holy and austere life. By the coming of the Paraclete, they said. Christian life and discipline should be improved. This im- provement was to consist: i. In the pro- hibitation of second marriages , 2. In the observing of .longer and more rigorous fasts. ( The Montanists, according to St. Jerome, kept three Lents, each of forty days.) 3. In forbidding flight from perse- cution ami in prohibiting Christians from following any literary pursuits , 4. In ab- solutely jefusing absolution to all who, after baptism, became guilty to apostasy,



    Moravian Brethren

    murder, unchastity, and similar great sins. They denied to the Church the power of re- mitting such sins. The Montanists obtained a zealous and gifted advocate in TertuUian, who, between the years 200 and 203, be- came himself the author of a new Monta- nist party, called after him Tertullianists. In the time of St. Augustine, the Mon- tanists had about disappeared from Africa. They were also called " Cataphrygians " and " Pepuzians," from Pepuza, a small town in Phrygia which they called their " Jerusalem."

    Month {Hebre-w) . — The Hebrew months were lunar, that is, extending from one new moon to another; but as 12 lunar months made but 354 days and 6 hours, the Jewish year fell short of the solar year nearly 11 days. To compensate for this difference, every three years a thirteenth month was intercalated, called Vedar, the second Adar. At the exodus from Egypt God ordained that the month — the seventh of the civil year — should be the first of the sacred -year, by which the religious festivals were to be reckoned. The months were usually designated as first, second, etc., and the names by which they are now known seem to have been adopted during the captivity.




    VII I. Nisan or Abib. . .March or April. Neh.

    ii. I. VIII ... .II. Zif or Ziv April or May. III. Ki.

    vi. I. IX III. Sivan May or June. Esth.

    viii. g.

    X IV. Tamtnuz June or July.

    XI V. Ab July or August.

    XII VI. Elul August or September.

    Neh. vi. 15.

    I VII. Ethanim or

    Tishri September or October.

    III. Ki. viii. 2. II VIII. Bui October or November.

    III. Ki. vi. 38. Ill IX. Chisleu November or Decem- ber. Neh. i. I. IV X. Tebeth December or January.

    Esth. ii. 16. V XI. Shebat January or February.

    Ezech. i. 17. VI XII. Adar February or March.

    Esth. iii. 7.

    Morality of Human Actions. — Human actions are morally good or evil according as they agree or disagree with the divine commandments. Holy Scripture charac- terizes our actions as good or bad according to their agreement with the divine will. It insists that the fulfillment of God's com-

    mands, i.e., the conformity to the divinewill, is the cause of the divine complacence, and consequently, of our salvation ; while the transgression of them, i. e., the disagree- ment with the divine will, is the cause of God's displeasure and of eternal damnation (Matt. vii. 21; xix. 17; John viii. 29). As a wise and bountiful Creator, God ap- pointed to every creature, and to man in particular, a suitable end. Man's end is eternal happiness. The attainment of this end is, therefore, what God requires of man — the fulfillment of the divine will. Every action, therefore, which brings us nearer this end, and is, therefore, conform- able to God's will, is morally good ; for it puts us in the right and God-intended rela- tion to our last end. Every action, on the other hand, which withdraws us from this end, is, for that reason, contrary to the divine will, for it brings us into a false re- lation to God, our Creator. In short, an action is in accordance with the God- , intended order of things, or morally good, when it is conformable to the divine will, and contrary to order, or morally evil, when it is repugnant to the divine will.

    Moravian Brethren (also called " Herrn- hutters") (see this word). — The American Moravians consider themselves legitimate successors of the " Unitas Fratrum " | {Untied Brethren). They claim an un- broken succession of bishops from the apostles, through an Austrian branch of the Waldenses. The first settlement of Moravian Brethren in America was at Savannah, Georgia, in 1735, but was aban- doned five years later, and a new coloniza- tion begun at Bethlehem, in the Lehigh valley of Pennsylvania. The last named place is their headquarters and the seat of their theological seminary and college. They also founded Lititz and Nazareth, in the same state, and Salem, in North Caro- lina, all of which were at first exclusive communal towns, similar to those founded by the renewed Unitas Fratrum in Ger- many and Great Britain. The principle of exclusivism, which is dying out in Eu- rope, was entirely abandoned in America, the last vestige of it disappearing in 1856. The American province of the Moravian Church has two divisions, a northern and a southern, each with its own provincial synod. The northern division is divided into five districts, covering convenient ter- ritorial limits, delegates from which com- pose the synod. All the important acts of




    the synod, however, are subject to the rati- fication of the Unity's Elders' Conference, including the selection of bishops. Elec- tion by "apostolic lot" is no more prac- ticed,except occasionally by special request, in the selection of bishops. Marriages by " lot " were abolished by the General Synod in 1818. In 1895, the northern pro- vince comprised 80 congregations, with a total membership of 16,329; contributed $111,276 for Church support, and $23,343 for missions, pensions, etc. The southern province reported a total membership of 3,548. The synods meet once in five years. The missionary work of the Church, in proportion to its numerical strength, is very extensive. The American province, aided by the Unity's Elders 'Conference, sus- tains missions in Greenland, Labrador, and among the North American Indians in cen- tral and southern America and in Alaska, the latter including 9 stations, 12 mission- ^ aries, 14 native assistants and some 400 converts. The general missionary work controlled by the parent Church in Ger- many extends to nearly all quarters of the globe. The theological school at Bethle- hem has an endowment of $75,000, a six- year's course of study, and an average enrollment of about fifty students. Four general schools are located at Bethlehem, Lititz and Nazareth, Pennsylvania, and at Salem, North Carolina, respectively. Two weekly papers and a Sunday-school paper are issued from the publishing house at Bethlehem, and also an American edition of the Text-Book, the official year-book of the denomination.

    More (Sir Thomas) (1478-1535). — Born in London. An English statesman and author. Succeeded Wolsey as chan- cellor of England in 1529. He opposed the reforms passed by parliament Nov. 3d, 1529, and the projected divorce of the king from Catharine of Aragon, and re-^ signed May 13th, 1532. By act of parlia- ment in March, 1534, an oath of adherence to the act which vested the succession in the issue of Anne Boleyn, and of renuncia- tion of the Pope, was imposed. This oath More refused to take, and he was com- mitted to the tower April 17th, 1535. On July ist, 1535, he was indicted for high treason, and was executed July 6th, 1533. More was beatified by Pope Leo XIII. Dec. 9th, 1886.

    Moria. — A hill in Jerusalem, the site of Solomon's Temple. Tradition has often

    identified this, but on insufficient grounds, with the hill of Isaac's sacrifice in the " land of Moria" (Gen. xxii.).

    Mormons. — The Mormons or "Latter Day Saints," were founded in North America by Joseph Smith (died, 1844). He was born in the beginning of the present century, in the state of Vermont, of dis- reputable parents, and was always a vision- ary. In 1830 he proclaimed that in Sep- tember, 1827, he had received from an angel the record of the earliest inhabitants of America, engraven on golden plates ; this record he affirmed was once written by the prophet Mormon, who buried the plates in the earth. The document has been proved to be a nearly literal tran- script of an unprinted romance written by Solomon Spalding at the beginning of this century. After several wanderings. Smith's adherents, who from a small be- ginning have increased to considerable numbers, settled in 1847 on the shores of Salt Lake, in the present state of Utah, and under Smith's successor, Brigham Young (died, 1877), founded the New Jerusalem, a theo-democracy, of which Brigham Young became president. They have introduced polygamy as a distinctive institution, and also have a partial community of goods. The sect is very similar to Mohammedan- ism. From Utah they sent out mission- aries to every part of the world to make converts. The territory they inhabited was created a state by Congress in 1892 ; the number of inhabitants in 1880 was 143,- 936, most of whom were emigrants from Great Britain and from the European Con- tinent. In 1871 action was taken in the courts of the United States against polygamy as a criminal offense, and in 1891, Congress passed a law for the entire suppression of Mormonism.

    Mortal Sin. See Sm.

    Mosaic Cosmogony. See Cosmog- ony.

    Mosaism (law of Moses). — Mosaism comprises the beliefs, writings, and pre- cepts which form the Mosaic system. The capital work of Moses, was the founding of a religious and political government un- der divine inspiration, and in accordance with the truths revealed. Anti-Catholic exegesis has contested that Monotheism was the primitive religion of the Hebrews, and strove to date its beginning in the time of the Prophets. They then opposed to




    the sole God Jahve or Javeh (Jehova), par- ticular God of Israel, the Elohim of the patriarchal time, a multitude of genii act- ing in common, to form in appearance only one sole power, and thus, according to infidelity, Elohism produced Monothe- ism, the latter ending by becoming the ex- clusive belief of the Jews. According to Renan, the monotheistic religion of the Prophets was a return to primitive Elo- hism and the result of an evolution tending to give to Jahve the traits of Elohim. M. Renan admits, however, that in the time of the patriarchs, Jahve and Elohim were synonyms. True exegesis, founded on faith and science, rejects these impious er- rors. It proves that we must not behold in the Pentateuch the fusion of two ac- counts, the one Jehovistic the other Elo- histic, which would rob Moses of the composition of the Biblical books bearing his name. The precepts of Moses concern not only the religious life of the people of Israel but their national life as well. He did not limit himself to transmit to them the Decalogue ; in the name of God, he gave to them a number of legal and ceremonial precepts : all his laws grouped themselves around the fundamental idea of God's kingdom, whose people Israel was. Moses constructed the Ark of the Covenant ; founded the priesthood ; de- termined the religious festival days, the greatest of which was the Pasch ; and regu- lated all that concerned the blessings, the purifications, and expiations. Aaron, brother of Moses, became the high-priest of the Jews. The whole national life became figurative, and there is not one single detail that does not remind us of the Messias.

    Moses. — Son of Amram and Jochabed, of the tribe of Levi, born in Egypt in a time when an edict of the king ordered the Hebrews to throw all their male children into the river Nile. He was saved by the daughter of the Pharao and educated by her. He was instructed in the wisdom or science of the Egyptians; but when he killed an Egyptian whom he saw illtreating a He- brew, he fled into the country of Madian, where the priest Jethro, whose flocks he watched, gave him his daughter in mar- riage. Admonished by a vision from the "burning bush" on Mount Horeb, and instructed by the orders of God, he re- turned into Egypt to deliver the people of Israel from bondage and associated Aaron,

    his brother, in his mission. He struck Egypt with ten plagues to coerce the Pharao to permit the departure of the de- scendants of Abraham and Jacob from Egypt, who then formed a great people. After having crossed the Red Sea, the Is- raelites received God's law from the hands of Moses on Mount Sinai, and they wan- dered during forty years in the desert. Moses had often to check the revolts of the people nourished with manna. He con- firmed the political union of the nation and made them the people of God. He gave them laws and prescribed rules for the divine worship. But it was Josue, his successor, who as guide and chief of the people, led them into the Promised Land. Moses died on Mount Abarim or Nebo, whence he beheld the country which he himself was not permitted to enter.

    Mozarabic Liturgfy (Mozarabic rite). — Under the Mohammedan dominion, the Mozarabs, — name given to Christians of Spain who descended from the Moors and Arabs, — continued to follow the Visigoth ritual, which finally took their name. This liturgy, established by St. Leander, arch- bishop of Seville, completed by St. Isidore, his brother and successor, approved in 633 by the Council of Toledo, was in use until the eleventh century in all Spain. The Roman Liturgy having gradually replaced it. Cardinal Ximenes granted to the Moz- arabic rite, a chapel in the cathedral of Toledo, and caused the publication of a Mozarabic Missal (1500) and Breviary (1502).

    Mozart (Wolfgang Amadeus) (1756- 1791). — Born at Salzburg, Austria ; died at Vienna. A celebrated Austrian composer. He possessed the most precocious, the richest, the most extraordinary musical talent the world ever saw. When between five and six years of age, he played the harpsichord with great skill and composed little pieces which his father wrote. In 1762 his father took him with his sister Marianne on a concert tour to Munich, Vi- enna, and other places, and in the next year to Paris, where they, especially Wolf- gang, excited great enthusiasm. At Lon- don the next year, they were equally successful, and remained in England till August, 1765. At the age of twelve years, he composed his first opera: La Tinta Simplice. Between 1770 and 1775 he com- posed a number of other works, which were well received, but he derived from




    them so little pecuniary benefit that he was obliged to accept the place as organist at the court of the prince-bishop of Salz- burg (1779). In 1791 he wrote his three great symphonies and the Magic Flute, and in this year received the famous com- mission from a mysterious stranger (after- wards known to be the steward of Count Walsegg) to write a requiem Mass to be finished within a month. His enfeebled health and various circumstances connected with the commission produced a serious eflfect on his already troubled brain, and he imagined it to be a summons from the other world. He began the Mass, how- ever, and said that it was for his own fu- neral. As he was already dying, he was not able to supervise the rehearsal of the finished part. He died of malignant typhus fever. Mozart left over 600 com- positions, which include more than 40 symphonies, a number of masses, sonatas, quartets, etc.

    Muratori (Ludovico Antonio) (1672- 1750). — Born at Vignola, Italy; died at Modena. A celebrated Italian antiquary, director of the Ambrosian College and Library at Milan, and later, librarian of the Duke of Modena. His chief works are: Rerum Italicarum Scriptores; An- tiquitates ItaliccE Medii yEi'i; Annali cf Italia.

    Muratorian Fragment on the Canon of Holy Scripture is the name which has been given to a Latin fragment discovered by the above Italian scholar, Muratori, in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, in a manu- script bearing the marks of great antiquity. Its date is determined by its reference to the shepherd of Hermas, which, says the Fragment, Hermas "wrote very recently in our times, while the Bishop Pius, his brother, occupied the Chair of the Church at Rome." The latter of the two dates given for the death of Pius is A. d. 157. The composition of the Fragment must have followed soon afterwards. Though mutilated at the beginning, as well as the end, its testimony to the existence of the four canonical Gospels is decisive.

    Murder. — By the fifth commandment we are forbidden to take away the life of any human being, either directly by volun- tarily committing murder, or indirectly by willingly allowing a death to occur, which is in our power to prevent, or by permit- ting anything that might lead to a like

    crime. " Whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment "(Matt. v. 21). Con- sequently, not only homicide, and suicide, but duelling, and all injury and abuse of others, frequently leading to violence and loss of life, is against the fifth command- ment ; these being most sinful acts of crim- inal injustice against the Creator and the created. To kill is a sin against God, as supreme and only master of the giving or taking of life ; for, " the Lord killeth and maketh alive. He bringeth down to hell and bringeth back again" (I. Kings ii. 6). And to kill is a sin against man, whose right to live is bestowed by his Creator, and whose murder will be avenged by God. "Whosoever shall shed man's blood, his blood shall be shed : for man was made to the image of God " (Gen. ix. 6).

    Putting to death is lawful, in case of sentence of condemnation by legitimate authority, this being a power admitted by all people, as necessary for the public good, and recognized also as legal and right by the Church. The ruler of a coun- try is " an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil" (Rom. xiii. 4), To slay is permitted in war, because although war in itself is deplorable, and must in- evitably cause bitter consequences to so many, a just war is regarded as excusable and sometimes indispensable, and has been waged as such in all countries and all ages, uncondemned by the Church. Homicide is also admissible for legitimate defense of ourselves or our neighbor, when it is in- dispensable for the saving of life, or very valuable property, against the aggressor. See Duel and Suicide.

    Music {Sacred). — From the time of the apostles to the present day the Church, in the performance of her sacred rites and es- pecially in the solemn sacrifice of the Mass, has always employed music for the pur- pose of more easily turning men's thoughts to God, and of worshipping God in a man- ner more befitting His majesty. For, as St. John Chrysostom remarks "there is nothing better suited to rouse the soul of man, to raise it, as it were, above the things of earth and free it from the bonds of flesh, to inspire it with love of wisdom or fill it with contempt for all worldly beings than singing, and the rhythm of sacred hymns " ( Ps. 41. n. i.).

    These advantages, however, are to be derived only from that kind of music which most faithfully serves the purpose of reli-




    gion and is entirely consonant with the holiness of the object to which it is united. The use of such music is sanctioned by the Church; such she has always used in her solemn services, and such she recom- mends and prescribes for future use. She has always not only most carefully ex- cluded from her sacred rites such secular compositions and voluptuous singing as are calculated to distract the mind and fill it with thoughts of worldly pleasure, but she has ever abhorred and denounced them as being most hurtful to religion and posi- tively injurious to souls. Guided by the pre- scriptions and admonitions of the Fathers and sovereign PontiflFs, the Second Plen- ary Council of Baltimore decrees and di- rects that all priests labor assiduously to correct whatever abuses may have crept into the vocal and instrumental music in their Chufches. Hence it is a duty incum- bent upon priests to personally superintend the selection of music for their Churches and never permit the house of God to be profaned by secular music, and to allow in it only such airs as are grave, devotional and truly religious. Also it is a duty of the priest to exclude from the Mass, all singing which mutilates the words of the Liturgy as well as that which abounds in too frequent repetitions, or so transposes the words as to change or totally destroy their meaning. Also the singing ought to be so regulated as not to interrupt the Mass in places where interruptions are not permitted by the rubrics; that, if possible the music be made to accord with the sea- sons of the year and the classes of the re- ligious feasts, and that in those places where the Vesper service is held, the entire Vespers, that is, the Psalms without mutila- tion or abridgment, be sung. See Plain Chant.

    Mysia. — A province in the northwest corner of Asia Minor, which was traversed by the Apostle St. Paul on his first journey to Europe (Acts xvi. 7, 8).

    Mystery. — The word *' mystery " is used in the Christian doctrine to express the truths which God has revealed and which we must believe, albeit we cannot com- pletely explain or comprehend them. Be- cause a thing is not within the grasp of our intellect, is no reason why it should not exist ; for how numerous are the secrets of nature, inexplicable, and, in their own way, even mysterious, and withal accepted as undoubted facts ! It is fitting, there-

    fore, we should believe, and that most firmly, mysteries of the Christian doctrine revealed to us by God, and which oblige us to recognize His almighty dominion over our intelligence. It is only reason- able that we should receive with faith the teachings of God, whose perfection and omnipotence are unlimited and infallible, instead of refusing to accept mysteries of the Christian religion simply because we cannot fathom them. Such refusal, in the case of many, even of the most highly gifted, arises undoubtedly from prejudice, insufficient knowledge, hasty conclusions, egotism, or personal motives in accepting what is contrary to the precepts of our holy religion.

    Mysticism. — Doctrine, disposition of those who lead a contemplative life, and hidden, so to speak, in God. It is a super- natural state of passive prayer in which a soul, that has crucified in itself all earthly affections, that has disengaged itself from all visible things and accustomed itself to converse in heaven, is so elevated by God, that its faculties are solely fixed upon Him without reasoning and without corporal images represented by the imagination. In this state, by quiet, but fervent medita- tion, and by an inner life of the mind, the soul beholds God as an immense eternal light, and, ravished in ecstasy, it con- templates His infinite beauty. His love without limits, and His other adorable perfections. By this operation, all the soul's affections and faculties seem to be transformed in God through love, where it rests quietly in meditation of pure faith ; where it employs all its affections to bring forth acts enflamed with praise, adoration, etc. St. Francis of Sales, St. Theresa, St. John of the Cross, and all other authors of spiritual life who wrote on mysticism, tell us about the same thing.

    Myth (story, legend). — Many critics have maintained that there are myths in both the Old and New Testament. But it is easy to show the falseness of this asser- tion by the following considerations: i. The early Christians, the most competent judges of the subject, far from having recognized myths in the Old Testament, beheld therein only a pure and simple his- tory of positive and real events. 2. In the history of the ancient Hebrews, altogether unlike all the other nations of antiquity, there never have been obscure, uncertain, and fabulous times, and consequently.




    favorable to the introduction of myths. 3. The stories of the Old Testament offer nothing revolting or shocking to the en- lightened critic free from all prejudice. 4. The Biblical traditions could easily keep themselves free from myths on ac- count of their nature and manner in which they have been drawn up. On the the other hand, it is equally false to pre- tend that there are myths in the New Testament. The reason which our ad- versaries allege in favor of their opinion reduces itself in telling us that myste-

    ries and miracles being impossible, all those related in the New Testament must nec- essarily be considered as simple myths. But this pretended impossibility is a pure illusion (see Miracle, Mystery). The writings of the New Testament are the work of authors who were eyewitnesses or contemporaries, and who were closely connected with the events and the time the facts of which they relate. Now, among these conditions, it is absolutely impossible that the facts related in the New Testament are mythical accounts.

    FOOTNOTE-1: General info:

      Mixed Theology answers especially to the wants of our time. It consists of articles whose characteristics are philosophical, scientific, artistic, and literary. This class of articles has for object to urge our contemporary adversaries, with the help of demonstrative resources that are offered by philosophy, the sciences, arts, and belles-lettres, to admit the great truths, continually attacked by them.

      They address themselves to all kinds of readers, and, by studying them carefully, may they put into practice the declared proposition of Pope Pius IX., before it was taken up again and embodied into the decrees of the Vatican Council: "The use of reason precedes faith and leads man to it with the help of revelation and grace"; Rationis usus jidem prcecedit, et ad earn kominem ape revelationis et gratice conducit. If some of the articles appear to have been given too much space, then the importance of the subjects makes up for this.

      Historical Theology has for its object, as the name implies, Theologico- Historic Generalities and Varieties. It comprises Popes, Councils, Particular Churches, Religious Orders, Famous Schools, Biographies and Bibliographies, Religious Sects, Ecclesiastical Dignities, etc.

      Finally, Pure Theology consists of Theological and Exegetical Genralities and Varieties ; God and the Creation ; Christ and all that is directly connected with Our Lord ; the Church and the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy ; Grace and the Sacraments ; Ecclesiastical Morals and Precepts, etc.

      These are, in great outlines, the subjects treated in the Ecclesiastical Dictionary. We shall be judged in the future. For to-day, our only ambition is to be appreciated in the simple exposition of the subjects contained in our work; and we trust that the book will find many readers, who are solely animated by the love of truth.