his bluff is called, has only one single non Catholic culprit to accuse, as against the numerous cases on your side which I have exposed in pamphlets of which I have supplied copies gratis to Messrs. Burns and Oates, as vouchers for any Curious to consult them. That single culprit turns out In he my unworthy self. But, no sane person can attribute to me the outward pomp or the deep social influence of a Cardinal. Again, though I have sometimes been betrayed into serious errors, Mr. Lunn makes no pretence now of producing detailed evidence for any parallel in me or arty other non-Roman Catholic, for Gasquet's unrepentant life and death. In one important respect—sins of commission as distinct from mere ornissimr—Mr. Lunn abandons the major half of his case. His the rest, he tries to escape on side-issues. He reviles me as a mere muck-raker. So he did in Critic and Convert; I at once called that bluff, and defied him to produce any reputable historian who would endorse that condemnation.
As to Luther's teaching of, vice in the guise of virtue, I have answered this in Roman Question with half-a-dozen brief lines. But if you, Sir, in this paper, or Masers. Burns and Oates, by a liberal .extension of half-a-dozen pages to each of us, care to promote more adequate discussion, I undertake to bring evidence for the fact that the world against which Luther revolted was worse in this respect, if possible, than the world which he helped to make.
Mr. Lunn's flight from reason is usually managed in two ways : (a) the Confidence Trick, and (b) lose Dixit.
(a) When hard up for reasons, he produces shadowy personages, as unreal to u5 as Mee 'Arris west° the famous Mrs. Gamp. He appeals to a highly competent theologian—or two, or three, or " many "—who join him in charging me with gross errors. I have repeatedly, but vainly, challenged him to give the name, and status, of ra least one among these shadowy theologians • these gentlemen are apparently as modest as they are learned and orthodox. I doubt whether Mr. Lunn will dare to repeat here in your paper, verbally and exactly, the half-a-dozen lines in which he has explained to me his excuses for refusing to break this seal of anonymity.
(b) So much for the .Confidence Trick ; and now for Mr. Lunn's Jose Dixits. The best example comes juai at the end of our joint book, and will enable tour readers to estimate the value of his assertion that I am full of errors, whereas he himself merits your implicit belief.
In my last letter within our agreed limits of space, I compared the beneficence of the Roman Church with those of other bodies, such as Quakers and Jews. I added " moreover, we must remember how large a proportion of the charities of your Church aro collected from Inclulgerices and the fear cri Purgatory." Mr. Lunn, omitting the five essential words which I have here italicised, wrote : " Your statement that to the present day, a verylarge number of your charities are paid for by Indulgences,' is a howler worthy of Kermit. In 1567 Pius V put an end to the association of Indulgences with fees ill otherfinancial transactions." This assertion of his violates notorious facts. Spain, the ultra-Catholic. ignored that prohibitory bull and compelled the Pope to allow a Cruzada, or Crusade Indulgence, which has continued for all these centuries, long after Crusades have ceased to exist You may buy (unle,ss Franco has 'stopped it) such an Indulgence in the open market for threequarters of a U.S.A. dollar. In 1859, for instance, the revenue from this ,mounted to 2,700,000.dollars gross Or 2,140.000 net. Indulgences are still associated on principle with acts of benevolence in general, and particularly with certain privileged churchee, altars, sr occasions. In your own column of ' Recommended Appeals," we find that for 5s. we may buy the spiritual fruits of many Masses in the Lady Chapel now building for. Liverpool Cathedral. All this Mr. I.unn sweeps away, in pure ignorance, with a etroke of the pen. I have no redress in Roman Question, where I have exhausted my allotted quota of words, while Mr. Lunn can command an, as yet, specified quota to conclude the book. But, if •ou will spare us a column each in THE CATHOLIC HERALD, Pt. Messrs. Burns and Oates a thousand mom each in Roman Question, I should be most willipg to debate a point so closely relevant to our main purpose rind rif such interest to all sincere Roman
G. G. LOOLION.
201, Chesterton Rood, Cambridge.