was slavery. What he said against servitude in the social order, we may plead against Vaticanism in the spiritual sphere; and no cloud of incense, which zeal, or flattery, or even love, can raise, should hide the disastrous truth from the vision of mankind.

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX A (p. 85).

THE following are the principal Replies from antagonists which I have seen. I have read the whole of them with care; and I have not knowingly omitted in this Rejoinder anything material to the main arguments that they contain. I place them as nearly as I can in chronological order :1. 'Reply to Mr. Gladstone.' By A Monk of St. Augustine's, Ramsgate. Nov. 15, 1874. London.

2. 'Expostulation in extremis.' By Lord Robert Montagu. London, 1874.

3. "The Döllingerites, Mr. Gladstone, and the Apostates from the Faith.' By Bishop Ullathorne. Nov. 17, 1874. London.

4. "The Abomination of Desolation.' By Rev. J. Coleridge, S. J. Nov. 23, 1874. London.

5. Very Rev. Canon Oakeley, Letters of. Nov. 16 and 27, 1874. In the 'Times.'

6. "Catholic Allegiance.' By Bishop Clifford. Clifton, Nov. 25, 1874.

7. 'Pastoral Letters.' By Bishop Vaughan. Dec. 3, 1874. London. The same, with Appendices, Jan. 1875.

8. Review of Mr. Gladstone's Expostulation, in 'The Month' for Dec. 1874 and Jan. 1875. By Rev. T. B. Parkinson, S. J.

9. 'External Aspects of the Gladstone Controversy.' In "The Month' of Jan. 1875.

10. 'An Ultramontane's Reply to Mr. Gladstone's Expostulations.' London, 1874.

11. Letter to J. D. Hutchinson, Esq. By Mr. J. Stores Smith, Nov. 29, 1874. In the 'Halifax Courier' of Dec. 5, 1874.

12. 'Letter to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P.' By A Scottish Catholic Layman. London, 1874. 13. 'Reply to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone's Political Expostulation.' By Monsignor Capel. London, 1874. 14. 'A Vindication of the Pope and the Catholic Religion.' By Mulhallen Marum, LL.B. Kilkenny, 1874.

15. 'Catholicity, Liberty, Allegiance, a Disquisition on . Mr. Gladstone's Expostulation.' By Rev. John Curry, Jan. 1, 1875. London, Dublin, Bradford.

16. 'Mr. Gladstone's Expostulation Unravelled.' By. Bishop Ullathorne. London, 1875.

17. 'Sul Tentativo Anticattolico in Inghilterra, e l'Opusculo del Onmo. Sig. Gladstone.' Di Monsignor Francesco Nardi. Roma, 1875.

18. 'A Letter to his Grace the Duke of Norfolk, on oc

casion of Mr. Gladstone's recent Expostulation.' By John Henry Newman, D.D., of the Oratory. London, 1875.

19. 'The Vatican Decrees in their bearing on Civil Allegiance.' By Henry Edward, Archbishop of Westminster. London, 1875.

20. 'The Dublin Review, Art. VII.' London, Jan. 1875, 21. ‘The Union Review,' Art. I. By Mr. A. P. de Lisle.

London, February, 1875.

I need not here refer particularly to the significant letters of favourable response which have proceeded from within the Roman Catholic communion, or from those who have been driven out of it by the Vatican Decrees.

APPENDIX B (p. 89).

"I lament not only to read the name, but to trace the arguments of Dr. von Döllinger in the pamphlet before me." -Abp. Manning, Letter to the 'Times,' Nov. 7, 1874.-' Vatican Decrees,' p. 4.

Justice to Dr. von Döllinger requires me to state that he had no concern, direct or indirect, in the production or the publication of the tract, and that he was, until it had gone to press, ignorant of its existence. Had he been a party to it, it could not have failed to be far more worthy of the attention it received.

Bishop Ullathorne goes further, and says of Dr. von Döllinger that "he never was a theologian."-Letter, p. 10.

Then they have made strange mistakes in Germany.

Werner, a writer who I believe is trustworthy, in his 'Geschichte der Katholischen Theologie,' 1866, is led by his subject to survey the actual staff and condition of the Roman Church. He says, p. 470; "Almost for an entire generation, Dr. I. von Döllinger has been held the most learned theologian of Germany; and he indisputably counts among the greatest intellectual lights that the Catholic Church of the present age has to show.".

I cite a still higher authority in Cardinal Schwarzenberg, Archbishop of Prague. On May 25, 1868, he addressed a letter to Cardinal Antonelli, in which he pointed out that the theologians, who had been summoned from Germany to the Council, were all of the same theological school, and that for the treatment of dogmatic matters it was most important that some more profound students, of more rich and universal learning, as well as sound in faith, should be called. He goes on to suggest the names of Hefele, Kuhn, and (with a high eulogy) Von Döllinger.

The strangest of all is yet behind. Cardinal Antonelli, in his reply dated July 15, receives with some favour the suggestion of Cardinal Schwarzenberg, and says that one

of the three theologians named would certainly have been invited to the Council, had not the Pope been informed that if invited, he would decline to come. That one was Dr. von Döllinger.

I cite the original documents, which will be found in Friedrich's 'Documenta ad illustrandum Conc. Vat.,' pp. 277-80.

APPENDIX C (p. 108).

As I have cited Schrader elsewhere, I cite him here also; simply because he translates (into German) upon a different construction of the Seventy-third Article of the Syllabus from that which I had adopted, and makes a disjunctive proposition out of two statements which appear to be in effect identical. In English, his conversion of the article runs as follows:-

"Among Christians no true matrimony can be constituted by virtue of a civil contract; and it is true that either the marriage contract between Christians is a Sacrament, or that the contract is null when the Sacrament is excluded.

"Remark. And, on this very account, is every contract entered into between man and woman, among Christians, without the Sacrament, in virtue of any civil law whatever, nothing else than a shameful and pernicious concubinage, so strongly condemned by the Church; and therefore the marriage-bond can never be separated from the Sacrament."*

The sum of the matter seems to be this. Wherever it has pleased the Pope to proclaim the Tridentine Decrees, civil marriage is concubinage. It is the duty of each concubinary (or party to concubinage), with or without the consent of the other party, to quit that guilty state. And as no law of Church or State binds a concubinary to marriage with the other concubinary, he (or she) is free, so far as the

* Schrader, Heft 11. p. 79. Wien, 1865.