In

Anglo-Romish clergy almost without exception. the episcopal manifesto of Bishop Ullathorne I see nothing to qualify the doctrine. In the Pastoral Letter of Bishop Vaughan the comfort we obtain is this-"it will never, as we believe, be exercised again;" and "it is a question purely speculative. It is no matter of Catholic faith, and is properly relegated to the schools."* Bishop Vaughan does

not appear to bear in mind that this is exactly what we were told, not by his predecessors of 1789, who denied Infallibility outright: not by the Synod of 1810, who affirmed it to be impossible that Infallibility ever could become an article of faith; but even in the "bated breath" of later times with respect to Infallibility itself, which, a little while after, was called back from the schools and the speculative region, and uplifted into the list of the Christian credenda; and of which we are now told that it has been believed always, and by all, only its boundaries have been a little better marked.

In the train of the Bishops (I except Bishop Clifford) come priests, monks, nay, laymen: Vaticanism in all its ranks and orders. And among these champions, not one adopts the language even of Bishop Doyle, much less of 1810, much less of 1789. The "Monk of St. Augustine's" is not ashamed to say that Bishop Doyle, who was put forward in his day as the champion and representative man of the body, "held opinions openly at variance with those of the great

mass.

* 'Pastoral Letter,' pp. 33, 34.

** See 'The Month,' Jan. 1875, pp. 82-4. Monk of St. Augus

Rome.

II

2. Title to the use of Force.

Equally clear, and equally unsatisfactory, are the Ultramontane declarations with respect to the title of the Church to employ force. Dr. Newman holds out a hand to brethren in distress by showing that a theological authority who inclines to the milder side, limits the kind of force, which the Church has of herself a right to employ. "The lighter punishments, though temporal and corporal, such as shutting up in a monastery, prison, flogging, and others of the same kind, short of effusion of blood, the Church, jure suo, can inflict."* And again: the Church does not claim the use of force generally, but only that use of force which Professor Nuytz denied.

We can from this source better understand the meaning of Archbishop Manning, when he states,** that the Church has authority from God to correct departures from justice by the use of "all its powers." The favourite mode of conveying this portion of truth a portion so modest that it loves not to be seen -is by stating that the Church is a "perfect society." "The Church is a society complete and perfect in and by itself, and amply sufficing not only to bring men to salvation and everlasting bliss, but also to establish and perfectly regulate social life among them."*** The Church has been created, says

tine's, p. 27, seq. Rev. J. Curry's 'Disquisition,' pp. 35, 41. Lord R. Montagu, 'Expostulation in extremis,' p. 51.

* Cardinal Soglia, as cited by Dr. Newman, pp. 89, 90. **Vatican Decrees,' p. 43.

*** Martin, S.J., 'De Matrimonio, Notiones Præviæ,' ci,

Bishop Vaughan, a "perfect society or kingdom," "with full authority in the triple order, as needful for a perfect kingdom, legislative, judicial, and coercive."* His Metropolitan treats the subject at some length; assures us that the members of his communion would not make use of force even if they were able, but nowhere disclaims the right.** Indeed he cannot: he dares not. The inexorable Syllabus binds him to maintain it, as Ixion was bound to his wheel.

The subject, however, is one of the burning class; and it appears to terrify even Archbishop Manning. He refers us to the famous brief or letter of Innocent III., headed Novit, in his Appendix, where he states that the text is given in full.*** In the document, as it is there given, will be found the Pope's assertion, that it is his part to pass judgment on sovereigns in respect of sin (ratione peccati), and that he can coerce them by ecclesiastical constraint (districtionem). But the text of the brief is, according to my copy of the Decretals, not given in full; and the copyist has done. the Pope scanty justice. He seems to have omitted what is the clearest and most important passage of the whole, since it distinctly shows that what is contemplated is the use of force.

"The Apostle also admonishes us to rebuke disturbers, and elsewhere he says: 'reprove, intreat, rebuke with all patience and doctrine. Now that we are able, and also bound to coerce, is plain from this, that the Lord says to the Prophet, who was one of the priests of Anathoth: 'Behold, I have appointed thee over the

nations and the kings, that thou mayest tear up, and pull down, and scatter, and build, and plant.""

With regard to Dr. Newman's limitation of the Proposition, I must cite an authority certainly higher in the Papal sense. The Jesuit Schrader has published, with a Papal approbation attached, a list of the affirmative propositions answering to the negative condemnations of the Syllabus. I extract his Article

24:-**

"The Church has the power to apply external coercion (äusseren Zwang anzuwenden): she has also a temporal authority direct and indirect."

The remark is appended, "Not souls alone are subject to her authority."

All, then, that I stated in the Expostulation, on the Deposing Power, and on the claims of the Roman Church to employ force, is more than made good.

It was, I suppose, to put what Burnet would call a face of propriety on these and such like tenets, that one of the combatants opposed to me in the present controversy has revived an ingenious illustration of that clever and able writer, the late Cardinal Wiseman. He held that certain doctrines present to us an unseemly appearance, because we stand outside the Papal Church, even as the most beautiful window

* Corpus Juris Canonici Decret. Greg. IX.,' II. 1. 13. I cite from Richter's ed. (Leipsic, 1839). It has the pretensions, and I believe the character, of a critical and careful edition. I do not however presume to determine the textual question.

** Schrader, as above, p. 64.

of stained glass in a church offers to those without only a confused congeries of paint and colours, while it is, to an eye viewing it from within, all glory and all beauty. But what does this amount to? It is simply to say, that when we look at the object in the free air and full light of day which God has given us, its structure is repulsive and its arrangement chaotic; but, if we will part with a great portion of that light, by passing within the walls of a building made by the hand of man, then, indeed, it will be better able to bear our scrutiny. It is an ill recommendation of a commodity, to point out that it looks the best where the light is scantiest.

VII. WARRANT OF ALLEGIANCE ACCORDING TO THE VATICAN.

3. Alleged Non-interference of the Popes for Two Hundred Years.

NOT satisfied with claiming to give guarantees for allegiance equal to those of their fellow-citizens, the champions of the Vatican have boldly taken a position in advance. They hold that they are in a condition to offer better warranty than ours, and this because they are guided by an infallible Pope, instead of an erratic private judgment; and because the Pope himself is exceedingly emphatic, even in the Syllabus, on the duties of subjects towards their rulers. Finally,