Page images
PDF
EPUB

W

LIBERAL TYRANNY IN ITALY.

HEREVER Liberalism is rampant-be it the Liberalism of Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Holyoake or for the Church Penny Whistle, there is sure to be tyranny. No matter what phase of this detestable principle is considered, whether in history or at the present moment in action, the result is all the same-the majority with vile principles overrides and tyrannizes over the minority with sound principles. Look at the Reformation in England, when the Bishops outraged their trusts; when low-born vagabonds, anxious to become subservient tools of Henry VIII., were made peers and endowed with the spoils of Monastery and Chantry-chapel, in reward for their dirty work. The minority was then shamefully oppressed, while the lukewarm and indifferent stood by to witness the action. Or, take the case of the Great Rebellion. Brute Force, ranged on the side of so-called "Liberalism," and recommended by the unctuous villains who then gained the upper hand, and brought ruin upon their country, became a principle of tyranny to all loyal and religious people. Both Loyalty and Religion were banished from the land; or were compelled to hide themselves away until the gross and glaring tyranny was overpast. So it is now. Is there a greater tyrant than the beggar who has been set on horseback, and who is naturally riding to destruction? And can there be found a more needless and stupid act of malignant tyranny than that with which our fellowCatholics of Italy have been treated by the recent Circular of Baron Nicotera, who represents the so-called "King of Italy." Guided by Freemasons and Freethinkers, and hating the beneficent influence of the Church of God-for the very best and most conclusive of reasons, because such people hate God, and would totally banish Him if they could-all religious processions are formally, but not legally abolished. This has been done, not by an Act of Parliament, but by a Circular from the Minister. Processions are thus condemned in principle and positively forbidden. It is only by special

favour, after special application, that they can take place at all. The adroit attacks-as in the case of the lesser and

greater monasteries in England-began by degrees. Firstly; the superior Clergy were attacked, then the monastic and religious orders; now it is the evident intention of the authorities to root out sacred customs and Christian rites which have been more or less observed ever since Italy was won to the Faith of Our Master. Of course this oppressive action, mean and malignant as it is, is alone upheld by Socialism, Indifferentism and Infidelity, and is only the obvious outcome of sham "Liberal principles. The Jacks-in-office, who neither fear God nor believe in Him, wish to show their own power. One special case, which recently occurred, is borrowed from a contemporary, who states it simply and without rhetorical adornment: and a more signal example of "Liberal" policy and vicious malignity it would not be easy to find :

"At Frascati, near Rome, the police authorities appear to have sought an opportunity to fasten a quarrel on the people. On the 22nd of August the Viaticum was carried to the sick without the bells, and without the prohibited solemnities. The terms of the edict were strictly followed. But the gendarmes illegally tried to prevent devout persons from following the Viaticum with their hats off, to shew respect to the Blessed Sacrament. Then a body of infantry armed at all points appeared, and by actual violence the persons who immediately followed the Viaticum were driven away. The officer in charge rudely caught the parish priest by the arm as he was carrying the Host, and told him to go from under the Baldacchino. The priest requested the officer to respect the Blessed Sacrament. The officer found he had gone too far, and contented himself with dispersing the crowd at the point of the bayonet, suffering only two persons, who carried lanterns, to accompany the Viaticum. Immense crowds assembled in the streets of Frascati, and intense indignation was excited when it was known that gentlemen and ladies of respectability, in common with the other inhabitants of the town, were thus violently prevented from performing an ordinary act of devotion-that of following Jesus in the Sacrament. The multitude repaired to the church to receive the parish priest with the Viaticum on his return, and before the re-entry of the Host into the church they sung the Te Deum outside in loud tones."

the

[ocr errors]

This is "Liberalism in action. All the world over its principles are the same: and yet the conductors of several newspapers of the Church of England, having such gross acts of tyranny brought before their notice, remain as dumb as the grave. The idea of feeling the smallest interest in the persecution of our Italian brethren never enters into their heads. Even the "most Catholic," as they call themselves, are voiceless and speechless on the subject; while as for the general run of parsons, the idea of sympathy with the sufferers of "Serve them right!" say some; while Italy does not exist. of course Liberals and Unbelievers generally rejoice that their own false principles have found practical exercise, under the guidance of Italian Freethinkers to the great detriment of order, morality and True Religion.

Reviews and Notices of New Books.

ON THE CLAUSE " AND THE SON," IN REGARD TO THE EASTERN CHURCH AND THE BONN CONFERENCE. A Letter to the Rev. H. P. Liddon, D.D., by the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D. Oxford: Parker and Co. 1876. Pp. 188.

WR

[FIRST NOTICE.]

E have already, in a former number of the PILOT (May 10, 1876), when reviewing Dr. Liddon's translation of the Report of the Proceedings of the Bonn Conference in 1875, taken occasion to express our opinion on what seems to us the extremely unsatisfactory treatment which the question of the Double Procession received at that Conference. Dr. Pusey's misgivings on the subject gave rise to the letters which he addressed to the Times some months ago, and, at the request of his friend Dr. Liddon, he has just published the treatise of which we now desire to give our readers a brief account. Upon its great from the misconceptions, so very generally prevalent among value in tending to clear the minds of English Churchmen them, with regard to this question, it is needless to dwell. Its revered author is entitled to speak on such a theme with an authority not second to that of any living theologian in Christendom; and we are much mistaken if this book will not have the effect from our point of view, the healthy effect of very considerably modifying the conclusions arrived at even by some of our most learned Clergy.

With the object of the Bonn Conference Dr. Pusey entirely sympathizes; and he holds it to be a duty to make any Unity. But he could have wished that the Conference had possible explanations in order to heal the Church's broken gone to work in a different way. He regrets that Dr. Liddon's own proposal was not adopted by the Westerns-to offer to the Orientals that very explanation of our Western formula, which has been in former ages-as, for instance, at Florence

accepted as satisfactory: that is to say, that, while we retain the Filioque for our own use, we utterly reject the idea of there being two "Principles" or "Causes" within the Godhead. Certainly the Council of Florence failed finally to effect the union of East and West. But the reason of this is to be found, not in the insufficiency of the explanations made, but in causes entirely different. The Councils for Reunion, both at Lyons and at Florence, failed because they were merely political; and the disputes which followed them were due to what the Greeks considered-whether rightly or wrongly is not the question-to be the unfounded claims of the Roman See, and the Pope's attempt to go beyond the decrees of the Councils by enforcing the Filioque on the Greeks. The real matter at issue was not simply this doctrine, but the political and ecclesiastical relation of the two great Communions. So far as regards the Filioque, apart from other points of dispute, there seems to have been an amount of agreement sufficient to warrant the Westerns of the present day in hoping that the same explanations which were formerly accepted, may have a good chance of acceptance

[blocks in formation]

moreover enjoined on the Clergy, what was probably already a recognized duty, the learning of the Athanasian Creed by heart, Since, therefore, the doctrine of the West as to the Holy Spirit was universally expressed by the formula, "Proceeding from the Father and the Son," it seems morally certain that the Filioque was inserted in the Constantinopolitan Creed under the impression that it had accidentally dropped out. But such a mistake as this is neither an "irregularity" nor a "fault," and ought not to be so described.

Dr. Pusey deals most effectively with the allegation, made by Bishop Pearson, and often since repeated after him by others, that the Filioque was inserted in the Creed by Pope Nicolas I. This is a charge which rests solely on a hearsay report mentioned by the infamous Photius, who, villain as he was, on three other occasions declared just the opposite, when it suited his purpose to do so. In fact, the Popes were exactly those who, of all others, had least to do with the matter. Leo III. finally advised, not indeed the removal of the Filioque-though he had at first favoured even that step but the disuse of the Creed altogether. But the point where both he, and those who desired to use the Creed, agreed, was the dread of injuring the faith if the clause were removed. But though the Creed was not received in Rome, its use spread in the West, and it was first introduced at Rome in 1014. Thus Rome was the last to accept it, and there is no proof-Baronius would have been glad to find one-that any Pope formally received it.

But supposing the West had added to the Creed for their own use, did not the East do the same at Constantinople ? And if the principle be established that the East might, foe its own needs, add to the existing Creed, why should thr West be blamed if it acted in the same way? If the Greeks rightly modified at Constantinople the Creed of Nicea, then the West might also have been allowed to introduce the Filioque. The argument is unanswerable. The fact, however, remains the same-that the Filioque was not deliberately interpolated. "It was," as Dr. Pusey says, "in the first instance, admitted, as being supposed to be part of the Constantinopolitan Creed; and, since, after it had been rooted for 200 years, it was not uprooted for fear of uprooting also or perplexing the faith of the people, there was no fault either in its first reception, or in its subsequent retention." Dr. Pusey goes on to quote a catena of Greek authorities, subsequent to Photius, who entirely accepted the doctrine of the Filioque, even if they disliked the insertion of the clause in the Creed. Unless," he says, "it were heresy, it would be a mere childish piece of etiquette to demand its removal;" and he trusts that he has "removed the imputation that there was any wilful interpolation of the Creed; or that the present form of our Western Creed is owing to any arbitrary act of the Bishop of Rome."

resolutions. Coming down to details, Dr. Pusey notices the ambiguity of the second proposition, which affirmed that "the addition of the Filioque did not take not take place in an ecclesiastically regular manner." If this means that the Greeks could not be required to use the addition, it is a mere truism; and a truism, as Dr. Pusey says, could not form the basis of an Eirenicon, since it clears up nothing. And, in point of fact, this was not Dr. Döllinger's meaning, for he plainly declared that the addition was arbitrary and unlawful, and that its insertion involved a fault. Bishop Reinkens took the same view; and it is undoubtedly shared by many amongst ourselves, as, for instance, Dr. Wordsworth and Dr. Burgon. "People speak fluently," remarks Dr. Pusey, "of interpolations' and the like;" and he therefore proceeds at some length to review the early history of the Creed, in order to shew that it was never purposely interpolated. The reply to the old charge of interpolation against the Spanish Church is that it probably never had the Creed at all until the date of the alleged interpolation. The fact is, that the Constantinopolitan Creed was not generally received, or even widely heard of, until the Council of Chalcedon, for the simple reason that the Council of Constantinople itself, though we now know it as the second General Council, was not for a long time accepted as such. It was composed entirely of Eastern Bishops, and was called to stem a heresy which was almost exclusively Eastern. Its president, St. Meletius, was out of communion with Rome. So that both the Council and its Creed were long neglected; and even the third General Council, that of Ephesus, utterly ignored them both. St. Cyril did not know the Creed of Constantinople; and when the fourth General Council (of Chalcedon) had received it, and the West at last possessed both it and the former Creed of Nicea as a rule of faith, they were still not in use as part of the popular devotions. There was not, as yet, in the West, any need of either of them, and the Apostles' Creed, therefore, kept the place it had hitherto occupied. The Creed of Constantinople is first heard of as used in the West after the celebrated Third Council of Toledo. At that Council the recently-converted Arians accepted specifically the faith of Nicaea, of Constantinople, of Ephesus, and of Chalcedon. The Creed of Constantinople, as subscribed by them, includes the Filioque. Mr. Ffoulkes and others are fond of laying stress on the Ephesine Canon against the teaching of any "faith other than " (heteran pistin) that which the Council of Ephesus itself received-which, by the way, was not the Constantinopolitan, but the original Nicene Creed-contending that it forbids such an addition as the Filioque. Of this Canon more anon; but be it noted that the Council of Toledo was perfectly aware of its existence. How, then, do we account for the presence of the Filioque in its version of the Creeds? Dr. Pusey replies that they knew of no other form of the Creed but this one; so that, by some means, the Filioque had already found Another frequently-adduced argument (to which we have its way into the Latin version. The further question alluded above) against the lawfulness of the Filioque, is drawn remains as to how this came to pass; and to this Dr. from the Canon of the third General Council of Ephesus Pusey gives, what is to our mind, a most satisfactory reply. prohibiting "another faith" (heteran pistin) "beside" (para) The Spanish Church was probably familiar with the Filioque,the Creed of Nicæa. Now there are here just three point not only from its occurrence in a certain declaration, drawn demanding notice. First, this prohibition, on the face of it, up by the Spanish Bishops, nearly two centuries before, applies only to additions by individuals. Secondly, the against the domestic heresy of Priscillianism, but, above all, allusion must be to the promulgation of a heretical Creed ; from the Athanasian Creed. The well-known internal otherwise the Constantinopolitan Creed itself would stand evidence for the early date of the Quicunque is here briefly condemned, as containing additions to that of Nices. given; and the concise statements of the Double Procession Thirdly, St. Cyril, who presided at Ephesus, must probably made by the Latin Fathers of the fifth century are, as we himself have framed the Canon; and he takes pains to explain think, conclusively shown to be mere repetitions of its that what was not against the Creed was not beside (para) it. expressions. What Dr. Pusey calls "the naked identity of All this is amply confirmed by the next General Council at language" between all the members of the long catena of Chalcedon. Those, such as Mr. Ffoulkes, who rely on this writers" implies an identity of a formula, whose language it exploded argument, based on the Ephesine Canon, are simply is. And that formula was," he doubts not, "the Athanasian taking the identical line adopted by Eutyches, by the MonoCreed." "Those," he acutely remarks, "who have been so physites, and by the heretics of the Latrocinium-an interpreanxious to divest the Athanasian Creed of its title of Creed, tation which, in the case of the latter, earned for its leaders have overlooked that, in vindicating for it an old title, the deposition at the hands of the Council of Chalcedon. MorePsalm Quicunque,' they have been vindicating also its use in over, the Council of Chalcedon re-enacted this same Ephesine public worship, from the time of its being. A Canon, and yet defended St. Leo against those who taxed him Psalm is composed with no other object than to be recited." with breaking it. Much confirmatory testimony is also forthHe then contends that the wide use of its language would coming in later times. We hope, in our next issue, to deal have led us to expect that it was in common devotional use. with the second portion of this valuable book, which treats And this is confirmed by its constant occurrence in the in detail of the doctrine of the Filioque as held and taught Breviaries, in several of the more ancient of which it is by the Greek Fathers. appointed for daily recitation. A Canon of the sixth century

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

SONGS IN THE NIGHT, AND OTHER POEMS. By the Author of "Christian Schools and Scholars." London: Burns and Oates. 1876.

THE

HE features which are so obviously remarkable in this volume are, first, an intense love of Nature, and, secondly, a capacity of seeing things spiritual, as revealed by Almighty God in Christ, shadowed forth by the various natural objects of beauty which lie round man's path in this his day of probation. These two valuable gifts obviously belong to the accomplished lady who presides over the Dominican Convent of Stone, in Staffordshire, and who, judging from the volume under review, certainly owns considerable poetical gifts and no slight literary power; for both these are displayed here without any doubt.

[ocr errors]

The well-printed volume before us, consisting of nearly two hundred pages, is divided into three parts-1. Songs in the Night; 2. Miscellaneous Poems; and, 3. Imitations of Ancient English Poetry. The fifteen poems which make up the First Part are more or less connected with each other, and though mainly mystical in their subjects, make, at least, a coherent, if not a complete, whole. Light on the Hill-tops," "Sunrise," and "The Shadow of the Rock" strike us as far beyond the average of such productions, and indicate the possession on their author's part of considerable poetic ability, keen observance of external objects, and a Christian instinct of unerring good taste and sound judgment. "Returning," a poem of singular beauty, concludes thus:

Would that no wandering, earthborn cloud
Might ever Thy sweet Presence shroud,
No stormy wind of passion rise

To veil Thee from my watchful eyes;
So might I, in that Presence blest,
Live on, forgiven and at rest!

In many poems of this First Part there is a power of thought and a sweetness that charm and captivate the reader. Moreover, some of the mystical allusions are not so far-fetched (which is sometimes the case with modern writers) as to be unintelligible, or to raise a smile by their extravagance and want of point. "The Lost Flock" is beautifully tender and touching and suitably closes the First Part.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

We quote at length "The True Solitary" :

I built my nest in solitude,

I built it far away,

'Mid cliffs that rise above the sea,
Where scarce the wild goats stray.

There, hanging from the purple cliff,
The wild clematis clings,
And o'er the tangled wilderness
Its perfumed treasures flings.

The cawing rooks above my head,
Below the murmuring sea,

And busy in the scented thyme
The low hum of the bee;

The stock-dove's melancholy note
From out her covert green-
These are the only sounds that break
The stillness of the scene.

Here, then, beside the broad blue sea,
Which stretches wide its arms,

I'll feed a solitary heart

With Nature's peerless charmis.

And here, forgetful of the past,

Its fever and its strife,

I'll lean upon her quiet lap

And rest my weary life.

Vain were the thought! not Nature's sweets

Can yield the healing balm,

Restoring to the wounded heart

Its innocence and calm.

Not Nature's tenderest voice can soothe

The human spirit's fret,

Or charm to rest the haunted life

Of memory and regret.

Vainly we build the lofty nest

If self may still intrude;

A silence more intense be mine,
A deeper solitude.

Lead me into the wilderness,

From my own self apart;

Lead me, Thou Master of my life,
And whisper to my heart.

In busy toil, in crowded ways,
If Thou art by my side,
Still into desert paths Thy hand
Shall surely, safely guide.

Thy Presence is the Wilderness :
Thy love, alone, supreme,
Lifts me aloft, and clothes my life
With beauty like a dream.

Thy voice within my listening heart
In hours of silence heard,
Is sweeter far than falling brooks,
Or song of woodland bird.
The freshness of the ocean winds
Fans not my fainting brows;
I hear not waving overhead,
The rustling of the boughs.

But oh, more gentle than the air
That stirs the aspen trees,
Thy Spirit steals into my soul,
Like a soft, dewy breeze.

I miss the sunset's golden light,
Upon the western hill,
Earth's thousand magic melodies

Are silent all and still.

But Thou from off Thine Altar-Throne
Dost send a brighter ray,

Than ever on the sunset-fields
In emerald glory lay.

Then let me build my solitude
Not in the rocky cave,

Not where the rose and eglantine
Their flowery tendrils wave;

Nor where the floods lift up their voice,
Nor where the sea-birds dwell,
And mountain winds sweep wildly past
My lonely hermit cell:

But in the garden of Thy Love,
Fenced in from all beside,-
Wherever Thou dost choose my home,
So but Thy hand may guide.

So only from that fostering hand
My own be never freed,
Lead on into the wilderness,
And I shall rest indeed!

(Pp. 38-42.)

From the Second Part, which contains varied productions of considerable beauty-touches of feeling and descriptions of Nature full of truth, though some are a little wordy, and others somewhat wanting in vigour,—we quote a few stanzas of "Loss and Gain," one of the most feeling poems in the volume :

I remember

The Church tower so tall and grey,

There it is standing still

On the brow of its wooded hill,

You may see it for miles away:

The Sunday chimes in those olden times,

What a merry sound they bore!

As they came on the breeze through the sweet lime-trees,—

I never shall hear them more !

I remember

The long walks on the lonely down;
How sweetly the wind used to pass
Over the whistling grass,
And the gorse with its golden crown!
Wild and free as the tossing sea,

My child's heart frolicked there;
Ab, could I now but feel on my brow
The rush of that joyous ai!
I remember

Voices so sweet and low;

There was one each morning came
With its dear familiar name,

But it never calls me now:

The fireside blaze in those childish days,
It was all the world to me,
And whatever befell it seemed to go well
When I sat by my mother's knee.

I remember

Dear friends who are dead and gone;

The true, the loving-hearted,

They one by one departed

And left me sitting alone.

Now the long grass waves o'er their quiet graves,

And I think that I do not repine,

But I wish each day, as it passes away,

That the daisies were growing on mine. (Pp. 69-74.)

"A Lament" is full of expressive thought and beautiful ideas; while "Holy Joy" and "Footprints" are sweet and soothing both in their philosophy and poetry. "Autumn Thoughts" is a very musical production; and there is a true vigour of language about "The Zouave's Song" and "Mentana."

[ocr errors]

The "Imitations of Ancient English Poetry are carefully done, and display ability. All are founded on old models, some are paraphrases: others mere reproduction of the old in modern phraseology. "A Prayer to Our Lady" is from Vol. II., p. 13, of "Typographical Antiquities:" another is from Wright's and Halliwell's "Reliquiæ Antiquæ." "Maris Stella "—which we reproduce below,-from folio 2 of No. 613 of the Egerton MSS. in the British Museum, is well done :Mary beautiful and bright

Velut Maris Stella, Brighter than the Morning light, Parens et Puella;

I cry to Thee, look down on me,
Ladye! pray thy Son for me
Tam pia

That thy child may come to thee
Maria!

[blocks in formation]

All honest students of English literature know how thoroughly popular poems like these were in the ages of Faith. That part of the Gospel of Christianity known as "Devotion to our Lady and the Saints" (such as in the East St. Ephrem preached centuries before,) was wickedly and ruthlessly obliterated by the misbelievers and fanatics imported into England from Germany under the patronage of Edward VI. and Elizabeth the "Virgin" Queen-to our great and abiding loss.

The volume before us concludes with a modernized version, or perhaps rather an imitation, of the First Book of John Lydgate's "Court of Sapience "the longest and scarcest of his poems, first printed by William Caxton. It contains a debate between Truth and Mercy, Peace and Justice; and has been held by competent authorities to have supplied Milton-that "double-dyed thief of other men's brains," as Mr. Hawker of Morwenstow termed him-with materials for his description of Paradise. The version before us is vigorous, flowing in style, nervous and expressive-giving additional character and value to a volume of merit, far above the average,―a volume which we heartily commend to our readers.

[blocks in formation]

adhered to the old Faith had a monopoly of the privilege of torturing and killing their opponents, he had better read Stories of Martyr Priests (Washbourne), which contains the sad and yet glorious histories of more than thirty sufferers amongst the R. Catholic Clergy, during the reigns of the "Virgin" Queen-otherwise known as the "bright Occidental Star" -and of "the most high and mighty Prince James," and also under the Commonwealth. In nearly every case the only offence alleged against these holy men was the fact of their priest-. hood; nor can the case of Father Garnet, to whom the secret of the Gunpowder Plot had been revealed under the seal of confession, be considered an exception.

THE HE current number of The Month (Simpkin, Marshall, and Co.) contains several good articles: amongst others, one from the pen of Fr. Rowe, describes the present position of the law of elementary education, especially as it affects Roman Catholics, and pleads earnestly for their schools. Fr. Cardwell contributes the first instalment of an historical sketch, "Ferdinand the Second and Wallenstein," and Fr. M'Swiney the third part of his narrative of the wrongs of Polish Roman Catholics. Fr. Rickaby discusses the Canon of Scripture as laid down by St. Cyril of Jerusalem in his fourth Catechesis, and contends that the "Apocrypha" denounced by St. Cyril includes not only our Anglican "Apocrypha," so-called, but also the numerous forgeries then current. St. Cyril, we may admit, meant all those books whose authors are unknown. But when Fr. Rickaby, on the evidence of St. Athanasius, proceeds to show that, in St. Cyril's day, there was a marked line of demarcation between the deuterocanonical and the spurious books, we may just remark that the Anglican Church agrees in this view, and honours the "Apocrypha" accordingly.

THOS THOSE of the Clergy who are accustomed to give popular religious Instructions do not need to be reminded of the value-particularly in the case of children-of illustrating their teaching by appropriate anecdotes. The difficulty with many is, how to find suitable materials to use in this manner. This is a want which Mr. Arthur Jackson's Missioner's Manual of Anecdotes (Hayes), is designed to meet; and that he has admirably succeeded in his object will, we are sure, be the opinion of his readers. We cordially recommend the book, which will be found simply invaluable for Instructions or at Catechism. We ought to add that, besides a Table of Contents, arranged alphabetically according to subjects, there is an Index of Proper Names and another of well-known texts, all of which add very much to the practical usefulness of this excellent little volume.

WE

E have read, with great interest, Four Lectures delivered to the Brahmos in Bombay and Poona (Bombay Education Society) last year by Mr. Nehemiah Goreh, a converted Brahman of Benares, the centre of Hindoo philosophy. From the preface by Father Rivington, S.S.J.E., we learn that the author, who is now working in connection with the Evangelist Fathers, has previously published a learned book called "A Rational Refutation of Hindooism." The Brahmos, it is scarcely necessary to explain, are men who, in consequence of the progress of English education, have to a certain extent forsaken the Hindoo religion, and have for some years been endeavouring to find out a religion which shall be intellectually complete and morally satisfactory; whilst, at the same time, they are unable to accept the Christian Revelation. Their religion is, in fact, a pure Theism: they declare their belief in God, in virtue and vice, in a future state, in the duty of worshipping and loving God, and in the efficacy of prayer. The object of these Lectures is to induce those who have come thus far to go yet farther and embrace Christianity. In the first Lecture it is contended that nothing but the light of Christianity has, or possibly could have, enabled the Brahmos to acquire such truth as they already possess. Hence the duty of accepting the whole of the Christian Revelation. The religious books of Hindooism, like those of the Greeks and Romans, whilst inculcating much moral truth, are shewn to contain much which is the very reverse. This is the case, not merely with the later books, but even with the Vedas. In the second and third Lectures the author meets certain difficulties urged by the

Brahmos against Christianity, and especially the objection made against the severe judgments of God on sinners, as recorded in the Old Testament. Here he uses, with great effect, the same argument from analogy which Butler employed. The objections which are urged against the goodness of the God of the Old Testament would apply equally to the Author of Nature. This is an issue of the argument which the unclean philosopher of filth, now happily deadJohn Stuart Mill-a name which stinks in the recollection of all decent-minded people who know what he really was-was content to accept. But that which he thus impiously affirmed, a Brahmo would of course shrink from. Besides using this negative argument, Mr. Goreh sets forth, at considerable length, some of the obvious considerations which justify the severities of the Divine Judgments. The last Lecture, embodying several of Paley's arguments, is occupied with the positive proofs which establish the Divine origin of Christianity. It deals with the subject of the genuineness of miracles, involving that of the authenticity of the Gospels, and especially the miracle of our Lord's Resurrection.

MR. OWEN LEWIS, M.P., AND THE REV. DR. LITTLEDALE.

WE now publish at length (not having had room previously) the Correspondence referred to in the "Fortnightly Notes" of our last impression, from which it will be readily admitted that our strictures were neither over-vigorous nor uncalledfor. Mr. Owen Lewis evidently writes what he means and means what he writes :

9, Red Lion-square, London, W.C., 16th August, 1876. DEAR SIR,-Having learnt your address from your letter in to-day's PILOT I send you a few lines on the subject of your recent communication to the Guardian, privately, as I do not wish to increase scandal.

1. A lady, well-known to me, resident in a mountainous part of France, far from Paris, where the cures are regarded as not very eligible, was obliged, a couple of years ago, to bring her little daughter over to England to be prepared for confirmation by a R.C. priest in this country, because not only was her own parish priest a man of notoriously immoral character, but every clergyman round about for many miles was under one cloud or another, so that she dare not trust one of them with her child. The Church authorities, knowing that the district was one which dissolute clergymen would regard as penal exile, simply shot their rubbish there, but did nothing either to deprive the offenders or to warn the flocks. This I vouch for from personal knowledge of the facts.

2. Austria.-A devout R.C. friend of mine, who lives a good deal abroad every year, spoke to me of the very great difficulty he finds in meeting with parish priests to whom it is safe to send his young female servants for confession. He tells me that the number of Austrian Clergy who are supposed to be tolerably moral is five per cent. of the whole body.

3. Italy. The same friend informs me that he had very great diffi'culty in discovering a moral and trustworthy confessor in Florence, having had to withdraw his household from the first two or three priests he had sought, and being warned by ladies of position that the most careful and searching inquiry beforehand was necessary on moral grounds.

4. Brazil. I asked, many years ago, and long before the accession of the present Emperor, an experienced friend, many years resident in Bahia and Rio, as to the morals of the Clergy. His reply was confined to three words, and he never spoke on the subject to me again. The words were, "Sodom and Gomorrah."

5. Belgium.-There has been a long series of cases of gross immorality charged in the criminal courts for some time past against clerical persons, [and here, as also in France, the chief offenders happen to be the members of a religious congregation, the Christian Brothers] and one of the anti-clerical papers has been printing them almost weekly under the heading Acta Sanctorum.

I have had very unsatisfactory accounts from Spain also, but as they are less definite I do not dwell on them. But the facts in my possession as regards some of those very countries you have appealed to, make me only too certain that your favourable estimate cannot be borne out by statistics. In this country and in Ireland the presence of a powerful rival, whose clerical morality stands high, is a most salutary deterrent; but a very little inquiry amongst thoughtful and religious men of your own Church on the Continent, if not violent clerical partizans, would cause you to modify your present opinicn very seriously and sadly. I have no wish to draw you into a controversy which would be entirely useless to both of us, and the private character of this letter will assure you that I do not desire to fan the polemical fires of others. Owen Lewis Esq., M.P. R. F. LITTLEDALE.

62, Lansdowne-place, Brighton, August 25th, 1876. SIR, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th inst., in which you are good enough to offer me certain information as to the morality of the Catholic priesthood.

It does not appear to have occurred to you that it is just possible a Catholic layman may be as well acquainted with the character of his own clergy as one who does not belong to the Catholic Church, that other persons besides yourself and your friends may have travelled and even resided upon the Continent, and that a letter such as yours, addressed to a man who neither possesses nor covets the honour of your

personal acquaintance, who has not assailed the character of your coreligionists while defending that of his own, but has, on the contrary, carefully abstained from doing so, may be considered in the light of a gross impertinence.

It is, however, satisfactory to find that you "do not desire to fan the polemical fires of others, or to increase scandals." This certainly shows a desire on your part to turn over a new leaf and adopt a different course from that which has hitherto characterized your writings, whether anonymous or not, and so far you are to be congratulated upon a wish to effect a much-needed improvement, though I fear that your first attempt in that direction has hardly proved a success.

The first thing that strikes me in perusing your letter is, your cautious and prudent reticence with regard to such insignificant matters of detail as dates, names of persons, places, &c., anything, in fact, which might enable the locality to be identified, and an unpleasant responsibility fixed upon yourself. Doubtless, you had the old proverb in your mind about discretion being the better part of valour. The next thing observable is that all your statements are made upon the authority of other and nameless individuals, such as "a lady well known to me," "a devout R.C. friend," "an anti-clerical paper," not one on your own personal authority. This is known in legal phraseology as "hearsay evidence," and, a lawyer would tell you, would be summarily rejected in any court of justice. I have read and re-read your letter, sifted it carefully, and my opinion of the Catholic Clergy remains as it was. I cannot consider you a trustworthy witness, and am certain that no Catholic worthy of the name would have confided such scandals to you, supposing them, for argument's sake, to have occurred. We are not in the habit when some miserable scandal does take place of boasting of it to a bitter and unscrupulous enemy, to enable him to make capital out of it by magnifying it a hundred-fold; we keep such to ourselves. That scandals have occurred, do occur, and will to the end of time, we know, and on better authority than yours; that they happen to the extent you mention, we know is not the case. No, Sir, tell me what you please about clerical immorality, a subject which you and M. Loyson seem to batten on and enjoy like vultures and carrion-crows revelling in filth, but don't expect me to believe that any Catholic who practised his religion confided to you what you mention. Amongst ourselves we may mention with horror the rare and unfrequent story of some miserable priest who has broken his vows to the Almighty, and preferred the life of devils to that of angels, as we think with a cold shudder of his future doom, but we do not tell it to such men as you, and it would be passing strange if we did.

If there be a word of truth in your assertions, your information has been derived from the "Old Catholics," and I will at once admit that if the subject of ecclesiastical vice and broken vows has charms for you, and I can believe it, for, as the Times observed years ago, "there are persons who like to remain in the house while the drains are being opened," you could not go to a better quarter for practical information than to the men whom the Civil Power has forcibly inducted into the Swiss churches, from which the rightful pastors have been expelled-men who have left their country for her good, and to escape a French prison. If your letter refers to these men and their practices, I have not a word to say against it; and perhaps, from your well-known intimacy with them, it is the most likely as well as the most charitable view to take. I will, however, deal with your charges seriatim, and that briefly, for I have other and more congenial occupations to attend to. The statements about France, which you vouch for from personal acquaintance with things which happened to somebody else, resolve themselves into this: that an English lady residing there was unable to find among the fifty thousand French ecclesiastics, a single one who could safely be trusted to prepare her daughter for confirmation, (first communion, I suppose, is what you mean) and was obliged to come to England for the purpose. I don't know whether you expect me to believe this statement or not, but as I happen to know something about the French Clergy myself, and that not from "a devout R.C. friend," "a lady," "an anti-clerical paper," "men of my own Church who are not violent clerical partizans," &c., but from my own personal observation and experience, I will tell you very plainly and Credat Judæus. The Times is no friend of the Catholic Church, far deliberately, that it is too absurd to be worth contradicting. from it, but it knows that nothing is to be gained by making statements of this sort, and that, moreover, there is a kind of mud which only soils the hands of those who throw it; so, when referring to the French Clergy some months ago, it described them as "men of blameless

morality." It is possible, of course, for a priest to be a hypocrite and practise vice in secret while wearing a mask of virtue, just as it is possible he may be an Atheist, or a Mahometan, while preaching Orthodox doctrine; he may deceive his Bishop and parishioners, and and action of his life is subjected by the "Liberal" press in France. escape the searching, prying, ceaseless espionage to which every word This may happen in isolated cases, but when it does, it is known to God alone, and beyond the power of human ingenuity to prevent. To say that there are districts where un blushing immorality among the priesthood is the rule, and that with the full knowledge and sanction of the Authorities and of the public, is to make a large claim upon the credulity of those who know anything of the country or of its Clergy. We do not require to keep special dioceses for "shooting our rubbish into," as you classically express it. Dean Swift tells you how that commodity is disposed of in the Catholic Church.

Your personal acquaintance, through the statements of "a devout R.C. friend," with the ninety-five per cent. of the Austrian Clergy who are living in open and notorious profligacy is-well, a remarkable fact, which would be still more so, if it could by any possibility be true.

In Florence, where your knowledge of the facts for which you vouch rests upon, what the same devout and ubiquitous friend tells you, "ladies of position" have told him, as well as in Austria, a long course of Josephite laws and Masonic Government have,it is true, somewhat relaxed the bands of clerical discipline, and, coupled with a very defective system of ecclesiastical education, dete

« PreviousContinue »