A Curious Correspondence.

A CURIOUS CORRESPONDENCE .

( Continued from page 396 . ) IV .

Sir , —I thought that some abler pen than mine would have undertaken the task of offering a reply to the charges made by your correspondent " Nemesis " against the Society of Jesus . But most Catholics look npon these attacks as beneath notice . They are simply old charges that have been met and triumphantly repelled again and again . However , for my part , I think that snch wholesale calumnies should never be passed in silencethat isnever

, , when they are made with such a grave and voluminous assertion of truth and authority , and such an affectation of learning as your correspondent assumes . But , before we come to the Jesuits , I cannot hel p remarking that the defence of the Masonic body must be a hopeless undertaking if the " brethren " have no more powerful weapon to brandish than that which " Nemesis " makes use of . " Nemesis " is very indignant at the " sweeping statements " of Bishop Meurin .

INOW , had she called upon his Lordship to evidence his charges , a very interesting case would have been opened . But , true to her sex , she endeavours to demonstrate the injustice of the scolding she got by giving a scolding in return . She sketches a historical portrait of the Society of Jesus which , having no truth , lacks , therefore , the force of being an indirect argument against the Bishop . Sir , if a man , giving a survey of all the accusations that have ever been brought against the Jesuits omits to state that they have

been a hundred times scientifically refuted iu Europe ( and not long ago in the Prussian Parliament ) will not the judgment of an enlightened public opinion be that his lucubrations are inspired either by ignorance or by deliberate malice ? I single out only a few points from the many in which " Nemesis is mistaken .

1 . It is untrue that Ignatius of Loyola founded his society with the sovereign object of combating Protestantism . The society would have come into existence even had Protestantism never seen the li ght . 2 . It is untrue that Jesuits have no chance of legal defence against unjust reports made b y informers to the government of their order . "Nemesis " would have acted with more semblance of fairness if she had given the exact quotation from Mariana , or if she had enabled us to find the text . I challenge her to do so .

3 . It is untrue that the Jesuit is required to sever himself from the closest family ties , if by this statement "Nemesis" means that a sacrifice of filial duties is involved . She might as well charge Christ himself with inhumanit y for encouraging men to relinquish father and mother and follow Him . 4 . It is untrue that the confessor of a Jesuit is periodicall y furnished with a list upon which to write " personated " of the penitent gathered from '

his confessions . I challenge "Nemesis " to prove her statement . 5 . It is an unjust accusation a hundred times refuted that the moral writers mentioned b y " Nemesis" set up the diabolical principle that " the end justifies _ the means . " Would not "Nemesis" have caused double the sensation which her statement is apt to arouse among those who know not the truthif she had favoured us with quotations to substantiate this charge ? I

, challenge her to do so . On this point I may mention that the famous Jesuit Father Roh in the year 1852 offered , with the approbation of his superiors , a large pecuniary reward to anyone who should prove that this odious doctrine has been taught by the Jesuits , or is contained in the constitutions of their