234

Notices of Books.

The Anglican Theory of Unity. A Second Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of Birmingham. By the Right Rev. Bishop ULLATHORNE. London : Burns & Co.

is a very unusual circumstance that two works should be simultaneously

argument, as this work and the pamphlet of Mr. Allies, which we noticed by anticipation in our last number. The bishop's argument is in fact simply identical with Mr. Allies's, so far as he is occupied with assailing Dr. Pusey's miserable view of ecclesiastical unity, and miserable attempt to defend that view by the precedent of S. Augustine. Yet even on this head he puts forth one or two very important criticisms of the Eirenicon, which had not occurred to Mr. Allies. The following, e. g., is the first Catholic comment which we happen to have seen, on the most fundamental of all Dr. Pusey's errors concerning the Church's constitution; nor can anything be more forcibly thought and expressed.

Thus his

"But Dr. Pusey separates these attributes, and constructs four Churches from them, of which one is invisible, and three are visible. To the one Church he ascribes holiness and universality; to the three he attributes Apostolicity. Thus he not only divides Apostolicity from being commensurate with the One Catholic Church, but he divides Apostolicity itself, and distributes that qualification into three separate communions. theory is an eclecticism from the doctrines of the Low and the High Church parties of Anglicanism--an attempt to reconcile the two at the cost of the Creeds. His sympathy with the Evangelicals he does not merely leave us to conjecture; he tells us plainly I believe them to be "of the truth." I have ever believed, and believe, that their faith was, and is, on some points of doctrine, much truer than their words.' He accordingly adopts their theory of an invisible Church" (p. 16).

:

The Bishop is also the first Catholic critic who has exposed the miserable subjectivity of Dr. Pusey's scheme; its practical and virtual overthrow of all ecclesiastical organization whatever.

"Little can the advocates of this system have reflected how often, and under what circumstances, this theory of a spiritual Church has been raised ; or what fanaticism, what spiritual self-inebriating and bitter pride it has called up; or what social as well as moral disorders it has engendered and justified. It has been the invariable refuge of those sects which have assaulted the Apostolic ministry of the Church with unrelenting hostility; and

if the Unionists wished to destroy instead of reuniting those three visible communions, they could take no more effectual way than by inculcating that the One Catholic Church of Christ consists only of spiritual lovers, receiving all their gifts directly from God. They may strive to check the consequences by urging the necessity of some visible Apostolic ministry as a medium of grace; but others will not consider themselves bound to follow them into this part of their theory. Even Dr. Pusey has himself travelled beyond its bounds " (pp. 26-27).

And the author then proceeds to cite Dr. Pusey's portentous suggestion, that "Presbyterians have what they believe, we what we believe ;" as though all men as a matter of course possessed every spiritual privilege which they believe themselves to possess.

On the argument from S. Augustine we will not here speak at length, because we commented on it in our notice of Mr. Allies. We will only repeat what we said on that occasion: viz., that Dr. Pusey is imperatively called on, either to meet the very direct and heavy blows dealt by the Bishop, or else to admit (what at last cannot possibly be denied) that his whole reasoning on the African Church is one mass of worthless sophistry.

The following remarks are especially opportune at the present time, when doctrines most unquestionably Catholic are again and again assailed as "extreme" and as characteristic of a "party."

"Let me, before proceeding, take note of this abuse of the word Ultramontane. It is here put offensively for the whole Catholic communion; and I am sorry to see Dr. Pusey guilty of the same offensiveness in sundry places. As a controversial trick, it is simply unworthy; a sort of substitution for the word Popery, which last has grown vulgar. The word Ultramontane has a definite theological sense as opposed to the word Gallicanism. It bears exclusively upon particular questions relating to the prerogatives of the Sovereign Pontiff. It is unfair and ungenerous to speak of doctrines as Ultramontane, or as held by Ultramontanes, which are universally held in the Catholic and Roman communion; thus leaving the effect of an insinuation that they are the doctrines of some party amongst us. Even that antagonism which existed between Gallicanism and Ultramontanism, as it stood on its own special ground in the seventeenth century, exists no more. was mainly owing to the French Court, its courtiers and lawyers. Pascal himself, during the height of the combat, could not help noticing, that Scarcely anywhere except in France is it allowable in these days to say that the Council is above the Pope.' Gallicanism, as claiming an exceptional condition for France, died with the old régime. Napoleon reasserted its principles in the Organic Articles; a gross fraud upon the Concordat, which has only served to keep alive a strenuous resistance to their authority, as well on the part of the French Church, as on that of the Sovereign Pontiffs. Even the prerogatives of the Holy See, as they are universally believed throughout the Catholic Church, are not of Ultramontane but of Catholic doctrine" (p. 36, 7).

Again,―

It

"There is no occasion for going further to show what the Unionists mean by the Ecumenical intercommunion which was existing before the division of East and West.' They mean that the Pope should cease from being Pope. We also understand why these writers love to call us Catholics Ultramon

tanes; it means that we are Papists. And this association turns out, in effect, to be a society of prayer for the cessation of that supremacy which our Lord established in Peter. Exeter Hall is nothing else."

We are very grateful also to the author for making us acquainted with the admirably-reasoned passage from F. Lacordaire, which is inserted from p. 93 to p. 95.

Our readers may remember Dr. Littledale's language in regard to the first Roman decree against the A. P. U. C. He said that that decree ". was obtained by the intrigues of three or four well-known converts," especially that "master of the art of suppression and mis-statement," Mgr. Manning. It now appears that, whether or no Dr. Littledale knew better when he thus wrote, at all events the secretary of the A. P. U. C. was at that time well aware how absolutely unfounded was the notion of Mgr. Manning having had anything whatever to do with the matter. The Bishop had told him, as he now tells the world (p. 5), that the Roman decree originated with Cardinal Wiseman and with the Bishop himself, who, with unanimous episcopal approval, had addressed the Holy See for instructions on the subject. The Bishop has made no comment on Dr. Littledale's mis-statement. We suppose he thought that the only reasonable comment would be a more severe one than he chose to place on permanent and public record.

With a surprise which we cannot express, we have seen it recently stated by a Catholic writer that the condemnation of the A. P. U. C. was based, not on the essentially anti-Catholic principle of that association, but on the tone and temper of the Union Review. This is simply to say, in other words, that the Roman congregation professed one ground, but acted on another totally different. The various extravagant statements, of which this is a specimen, do but show more impressively how distinct and unmistakeable has been the ecclesiastical condemnation of the association; and all Catholics owe a heavy debt of gratitude to Bishop Ullathorne, for the attitude of opposition which he has so consistently maintained from the very first.

The Second Eve, or the Mother of Life. By V. DECHAMPS, Bishop of Namur. Authorized Translation. London: Burns & Co.

PERH

ERHAPS English Catholics are indebted for this volume to the Eirenicon. We know the case of one person many years ago, then on her way to the Church, who was goaded (as it were) into saying her first "Hail Mary," by way of reparation for the shocking insults on our Lady which she heard uttered by a Protestant bishop. In like manner there is more than one person, to our certain knowledge, and we believe there are several, who have been driven, by Dr. Pusey's irreverence, to study S. Alphonsus and Montfort with far greater zest and far more hearty appreciation than ever before. It must not, of course, be forgotten that Mgr. Dechamps is one of S. Alphonsus's spiritual children, and therefore an

enthusiast in his defence. Still, after reading Dr. Pusey, it is almost diverting to find the "Glories of Mary" thus spoken of. "This is my spiritual thermometer," said a friend to the author; "when I am careless and lukewarm, the treatise no longer suits me ; but when the eye of my soul is restored to its strength and purity, it finds itself in union with this precious book" (p. xii.). The author, indeed, does not agree with this opinion; but his disagreement arises from his thinking such praise too little. "Experience proves daily that the 'Glories of Mary' touches sinners and brings them back to God," no less truly than it edifies those who are interior and saintly. Mgr. Dechamps's own work, however, is on a different plan from the "Glories of Mary," being far more doctrinal and systematic. A careful dogmatic foundation is laid down for the whole devotional superstructure; and we fancy that several readers may find the present volume most interesting and satisfactory, who do not value the "Glories of Mary" as that admirable treatise deserves. In fact, the Bishop of Namur has made every chapter a brief dogmatic essay, closed by a suitable prayer.

"The

We need hardly mention--the Bishop being a Redemptorist-that his devotion appertains throughout to that "extreme" or Alphonsine type, with which we are ourselves far more in sympathy than with any other. He quotes Gregory XVI. as pronouncing that S. Alphonsus himself "shines among the greatest luminaries of the Church" (p. 89). "How blind do those appear, oh Lord, who fear to say too much of thy Mother"! (p. 27). more faithfully we follow the Divine order by constantly approaching Him by the blessed medium of His Mother, the more shall we find our prayers increase in the confidence which renders them efficacious. . . . Do we go less directly to God by going in company with His Mother?" (p. 96). "Let us venerate Mary with all the powers of our soul and all the affections of our heart" (p. 98). "There is nothing which we may not hope from a heart which is faithful to this devotion---a heart which does not lose hold of that merciful chain by which God has bound the hearts of His prodigal children in all ages to Himself. No wonder, then, that theologians give devotion to Mary as one of the most certain signs of predestination” (p. 192). S. Stanislaus Kotska "never began any action without first turning to an image of Mary to ask her blessing" (p. 198). "The Son, Omnipotent by nature, has made His Mother omnipotent by grace" (p. 204). And the calm, scientific tone in which the volume is written adds threefold force to such expressions.

The translation is beautifully executed; and we have to express our heartfelt gratitude for the boon bestowed by it on English Catholics.

Cardinal Wiseman and Bishop Challoner. By Rev. J. SIDDEN. London : Richardson.

MR

R. SIDDEN writes in a most genial and kindly spirit, and has a good word for every one. Nor can anything be more excellent than the purpose of his pamphlet. He thinks that many Anglicans are now fully

prepared to become Catholics, were they not deterred by their alarm of Mariolatry;" and he wishes to show them that their alarm is groundless. But, although we cannot but profoundly respect both Mr. Sidden's character and his intentions, we are obliged, nevertheless, to think the means adopted by him entirely inappropriate to his end. He aims, of course, at influencing-not violent fanatics-but pious, intelligent, and candid Anglicans yet the truths on which he lays stress are such, that no men of this kind ever doubted them. He points out (p. 6) that S. Alphonsus's extreme expressions, "however misintelligible by English separatists, bear a truly Christian and devout sense ;" and he also explains that, according to the belief of every Catholic, our Lady can no otherwise benefit us than by her prayers. But surely it is only the more violent and prejudiced of Protestants, who have any doubt on these two facts; and the stumblingblock of candid and intelligent Anglicans is something quite different. They would probably have no great objection to our addressing the most Blessed Virgin from time to time, with a view to obtaining her prayers. What alarms them, is the prominent position held by her in the mind of devout Catholics; the extremely important place assigned to her worship in the whole interior life; the constant and (as it were) indissoluble union between the thought of her and of her Son. For instance (see p. 146 of our present number), prayers indulgenced by successive Popes use such expressions as these "I give thee [Mary] all myself;" "I consecrate myself to thee without reserve;" "O Joseph, obtain for us that we may be entirely devoted to the service of Jesus and Mary." As Dr. Pusey has urged again and again, all this is quite different in kind from a mere practice of occasionally asking her to intercede for us; and we do not see that Mr. Sidden has said one word to remove this difficulty.

The real question for a Catholic's consideration is surely this:-Does the Church, or does she not, counsel the habitual and (as it were) unintermittent thought and remembrance of the Most Holy Virgin? Is such thought and remembrance, or is it not, an invaluable means of grace? Does it, or does it not, give extraordinary help in acquiring a true love for her Son? If it does not, then surely-considering the frightful prejudice excited in the nonCatholic mind by Marian devotions-it is the dictate of charity greatly to curtail and pare down those devotions; to cease from observing the Month of Mary; to exhibit her images far less conspicuously in our churches ; &c., &c. And this, as we shall immediately see, is Mr. Sidden's own practical conclusion. But if, on the contrary, the preceding question should be answered in the affirmative, then a Catholic will regard Anglican objections to his worship of Mary, just as he regards Unitarian objections to his worship of Jesus.

Mr. Sidden, we say, does not explicitly treat the preceding question at all; but implicitly he answers it in the negative. "Let us not needlessly add," he says (p. 12), "to the unreasoning fears of our Protestant fellow-countrymen ; let us, in all uncommanded forms of worship or devotion in public, charitably refrain from much that, not being necessary for ourselves, might tend to detain our neighbours in a mere fragmentary Christianity" (p. 13). He cannot of course mean that, for the sake of not shocking Protestants, we