ENGLISH Catholics are sometimes charged with indifference to the English saints, with looking to Lisieux instead of Rochester or London or Canterbury. It is not my purpose to argue the truth of this complaint; indeed I propose to take it for granted. Certainly there are C.T.S. tract cases where Ste. Therèse sells much better than Blessed Thomas More. And there is a sense in which no one has any right to grumble. A saint is a saint; the better Englishman for being so, but not the better saint for being English. The terms of reference, so to say, are not national, and there are considerable disadvantages about nationalism in hagiology. The elements of sanctity are the same everywhere. Still, it is also true that these elements are expressed differently, take on a different colouring, according to the natural circumstances of the person who manifests them. Grace builds upon nature, and though the saint is no more a saint for being English, yet he need be no less English for being a saint. Hence it is that we rightly find something congenial in saints of our own nation; hence, too, that our own saints are not ignored without loss. The essentials of sanctity are the same in all the saints, but in so stupendous a success everything is of interest. This man, this woman, succeeded in the only success that is really worth having. We watch their actions and ways in the hope of surprising their secret, and inevitably we want to imitate, so far as we can; to emulate, not only in the very heart of the thing, but in methods, habits, practices, whereby that heart was expressed and confirmed.