gained an infusion of fresh enthusiasm by the accession of a number of minds, for whom, by a peculiar concurrence of circumstances, its claims had all the zest of a novelty. On the Continent this great church looks like what she is, an ancient mechanism, much the worse for the wear, and revolving under the force of impulses given to it at a former period. But as the observer approaches that centre where, according to the Catholic theory, he should find the highest form of religious life and energy, he sees instead, a group of priests governing a numerous population by a system so detestable and so detested, that the rulers would not be safe amongst their own subjects for a week without a garrison of foreign troops. If the Papacy could be made invisible, or hidden under ground, or carried off to Thibet, where, according to those delightful travellers, the reverend fathers Huc and Gabet, it would find itself reflected in the system of the Lamas, the Catholic Church, relieved from its greatest scandal, might become much more formidable. But, unfortunately for that church, she cannot abolish the Pope. He is the keystone in the arch of the Roman Catholic theory, which has no consistency at all, except in its ultramontane or most extravagant form.

This renders it not difficult for a controversialist, who is willing to follow the great teachings of history, to make short work with the claims of the Roman Catholic Church. He may fling overboard at once all the tomes of doctrinal controversy as not needful to decide the issue between that church and common sense, and confine himself to the history of Papacy. If he finds the supposed centre of Catholic unity as abundant in scandals as any temporal court, and if he finds in the proceedings of the ruling power the interests of an Italian principality repeatedly and systematically preferred to the supposed interests of the Christian Church, he will not spend much time in a microscopic examination of those patristic rags and tatters with which laborious antiquaries piece out their theories of apostolical succession and Roman supremacy. The historical character of the papal administration is enough to establish

the conviction, that, if Christianity be the greatest of truths, its chief embodiment is not to be sought amidst the rubbish of that broken-down dominion, which French bayonets alone prevent from being swept away.

When the Caliphs of Bagdad lost their temporal power, the first result was a great improvement in their ecclesiastical character; and if the pontifical court were sent into permanent exile, the church might be the better for it. But the improvement would scarcely be more than temporary, because there seems to be an inveterate tendency in the system to generate abuses. The scandals of Avignon during the residence of the Popes were as great as those of Rome. The Papacy, therefore, is decidedly an encumbrance, though an encumbrance which Catholicism cannot get rid of. All that can be done is, to forget the concrete personality of the supreme pontiff, and to transform him as much as possible into an abstract idea. By this process it is possible for a courageous and consistent disputant like Count Joseph de Maistre to follow out his principles to results which are truly astonishing, but results which, even with the most persuasive eloquence, will only satisfy the mass of educated men that the premises must be false where the conclusions are so incredible.

Roman Catholic Astronomy.

Mr. Newman has shown immense moral courage in facing the consequences of his own logic; but there is an achievement in that line which still remains to be attempted. He has not yet directed any assault against the Newtonian astronomy. Why not? There would be no need to wound any remnant of old Academic pride by the confession of an Oxford The popular notion of the solar system might be recanted, without humiliation, as one of the heresies of Cambridge. The credit of the Infallible Authority certainly does seem to require this sacrifice. It may be said, indeed, that the councils of the Vatican have not despised an expedient, which

error.

always indicates weakness and disunion in Downing Street; and that, though with tardy reluctance, they have permitted the Copernican theory to be an open question. But is not this rather a stain to be wiped away from the escutcheon of infallibility? Surely those seven cardinals of the Roman Inquisition who, acting by the will of the Pope, signed the sentence of Galileo, knew what they were about. Their decision should be what English lawyers call a ruling case. The court was competent, the analogy of previous precedents strictly observed, and no technical form broken. With all due clearness and solemnity, those authorized interpreters branded the proposition, that the earth moves, as false and heretical. The feeble and trembling old man, in whom one of the grandest of human intellects was combined with a will either naturally weak or paralysed by the infirmities of seventy winters, yielded to his judges, and was sent to purge away his sin by penance in the solitude of a dungeon. Galileo submitted, but the opinion has got abroad that the earth was not equally compliant. All the astronomers on this side of the Alps still labour under the impression that our planet not only does not stand still, as it ought to do, but moves exactly in the path which the Inquisition declared to be heretical-presenting, indeed, a complete type of heresy by turning for ever round its own centre, and finding no rest. It is not wonderful that the Newtonian astronomy, involving notions of this kind, should be found to associate on the most uncomfortable terms with the dogmas of the Church of Rome; but now that development and workingout of principles are growing into fashion, may we not expect that this alien intruder will be at length boldly turned out of doors, as the monstrous offspring of the Reformation, reared up and kept alive to the present day by the English Protestant tradition?

If, however, the Church of Rome thinks it, upon the whole, more advisable to permit one of her decisions in a matter of such great importance to be overhauled and reversed by an English Protestant philosopher, it is a memorable recognition

of the fact that no church or creed can hold its ground in antagonism with science. Demonstration is not the basis of religious faith; but there can be no faith in that which is demonstrably false. The only faith that will endure is one that will coalesce easily and gladly with new truth; which fears neither science, nor history, nor criticism, but which welcomes every fresh discovery as so much new light thrown upon the ways and works of God.

Inevitable Decay of Catholicism.

The maintenance of the Roman Catholic creed in a consistent form is, amongst laymen, according to my observation, an exceptional thing. Catholic laymen rather avoid theorizing about their creed, having a feeling that it is not prudent to do So. If they once began to reason, doubt might occur, and when doubt begins there is no knowing where it may stop. Thus the tradition is kept unexamined, in the same wrappings of faith in which it has been received; and when, from habitual communication with Protestants, parts of it crumble away, the holders often become half-Protestant without knowing it, and without any uncomfortable feeling of inconsistency. Hence, in a perfectly free and friendly intercourse between Roman Catholics and Protestants, it seems to me inevitable that, as a general rule, the Roman Catholic religion must lose ground. That religion includes so many external observances, that the profession of it may remain, without any consciousness of insincerity, long after the belief has fallen away to a point which in the sixteenth century would have been thought worthy of the faggot. But wherever the two creeds intermingle, the whole atmosphere becomes Protestant. Catholicism can be kept in perfect preservation only in the cloister. Except in a few peculiarly-constituted minds, the theology of the middle ages will not blend with the large and active thought of modern times. The union may be accomplished and cemented artificially by the pressure of persecution. But in

this matter the fable of the traveller and his cloak is strictly to the point. There is nothing so dangerous to Catholicism as sunshine.

Hence it appears to me that the wit of man could not have devised anything more likely to be ultimately favourable to the Church of Rome in England, than the uproar which was made about the ecclesiastical titles. It was both a stimulus and an advertisement. To say nothing of its tendency to provoke in generous minds a reaction in favour of the weaker party, it could not but put all the Catholics on their mettle, and awaken attention everywhere to their claims. Now the English Roman Catholic laity are remarkably free from the propagandist spirit, and it was the worst possible policy to compel them, from a point of honour, to become zealous for the claims of their priesthood. The practical effect must be, that the ultramontane divines and the Oxford converts will be able henceforth to wield the whole influence of the Roman Catholic party, and to prevent every approach to union or compromise with Protestants in the all-important business of education.

In the United States, where the prelates of the Roman Catholic Church are allowed to adopt what titles and organization they please, there is much reason to believe that that church is losing ground. Bitter complaints have been made recently of the extent to which the Irish population in America, being there no longer tied to the ancient faith by the point of honour or by the identification of Protestantism with social hostility, has shaken off the yoke. This seems to me an inevitable result. For the Irish peasantry, though naturally fond of a formal and imposing worship, are also keen in seeing the weak points of the priesthood, much inclined to dabble in those very inquiries and controversies from which the educated Catholics stand aloof, and under favourable circumstances would be more likely than the English to get rid of a traditional error. If, instead of the system of persecution which began in Ireland at the Reformation, efficient schools had been generally established for instructing the people in their own language, and