TH

HESE letters, written by one who warmly advocates the definition of Pontifical Infallibility, refer directly to the extraordinary burst of Gallicanism which has so unexpectedly appeared in Paris during the present year. They have the advantage of a most lively and attractive style; and the Archbishop of Westminster, in an introductory letter, warmly and most justly congratulates the author on his "simple and popular" treatment of such "grave" questions. Nor is the reasoning less accurate because its exposition is popular.

On one question-which for ourselves we believe to be of far greater importance and difficulty than is sometimes supposed by Ultramontanes-we concur more heartily with the present writer than with some others who have written on the same side. We refer to the characteristics of an ex cathedrâ Act. "The Pope speaks ex cathedra," he says (p. 95), "whenever it is evident whether by his express declaration or by circumstances-that he is addressing himself to the whole Church, in virtue of that supreme power of teaching which has been granted to Peter and his successors."

The following sentence is admirable, with which he concludes his whole argument:

"Every supreme authority has necessarily the right of commanding, and still more the right of laying down the limits of his jurisdiction. I ask you, then, who determines the sense of laws, except the lawgiver himself? If you doubt whether a monarch has really intended to enact a certain law to issue a certain absolute command, to whom would you apply in order to know his intention except to himself? Let the same course be pursued in regard to [what you think may be] ex cathedrâ Acts" (p. 95).

We observe, with much pleasure (p. 57), the very honourable mention of F. Knox's admirable treatise on Infallibility.

Ce qui se passe au Concile. Paris : Plon.

Letters from Rome on the Council. By QUIRINUS. London: Rivingtons.

THE

HERE is a singular coincidence of tone and doctrine between these two volumes, both of which are written by persons who sincerely believe themselves Catholics in faith. This being so, their contents, to our mind, prove much more conclusively than can any Ultramontane argument, the absolute necessity of a definition on the Pope's authority in teaching.

VOL. XXV.—NO. XXIX. [New Series.]

Ꭱ

The Vatican Council, and a Duty of Catholics in regard to it. A Sermon preached on Whit-Sunday, 1870. By GEORGE CASE, D.D., Canon of Clifton, and Missionary Rector of S. Peter's, Gloucester.

C

YANON CASE'S ecclesiastical position entirely prevents us from expressing freely our opinion on this publication. He considers (Preface that the Vatican Council cannot, as yet, "justify its claim to the title" of "Ecumenical"; although in its first dogmatic constitution it has expressly claimed that title. Moreover, Canon Case thinks (p. 11) that even if it were Ecumenical, a Catholic is at liberty to regard its definitions as not being infallibly true," until they have been accepted by the Universal Church." If a Catholic priest can so express himself, it is of very urgent necessity certainly, that some definition on infallibility should be speedily put forth.

Joannis Baptista Franzelin e Societate Jesu, in Collegio Romano S. Theologiæ Professoris, Tractatus de Verbo Incarnato. Romæ et Taurini, apud Petrum Marietti. 1869.

THE

publication of F. Franzelin's treatises goes on apace. We are glad to take the fact as a sign that the race of serious students is not yet extinct, nor the whole world given over, without hope of release, to all-devouring, nought-digesting superficiality.

We have already expressed (January, 1870, p. 239) our appreciation of F. Franzelin's genius and method. The general characteristics of the present volume are exactly similar to those we noticed in "de Deo Uno et Trino," and the writer's individuality is strikingly apparent throughout.

The extent and importance of the ground covered by the treatise “de Verbo Incarnato," embracing, as it does, theology proper and anthropology, is not unknown to our readers, who will find, in the work before us, the whole explored in the most scientific and orthodox spirit. In his opening thesis the author divides the treatise in such a way as to give the reader a bird's-eye view of the course to be traversed, and of the principal points of the route. "Quamvis multiplex possit esse principium ordinis in distribuendis capitibus amplissimæ patentis doctrinæ de Incarnatione, hæc certe, quam adoptamus, tractationis distinctio (in quatuor videlicet præcipua capita de ipsa persona quæ manifestata est in carne; de natura deinde quam assumpsit; tum de formali ratione, qua natura eadem Verbo unita est; de munere denique Redemptoris, in quo Christus per ipsam Incarnationem est constitutus) non potest negari esse apta inter cæteras tum ratione principii ordinis, quod constituitur in causis, quas dicunt intrinsecas, ipsius subjecti earumque simplicissima analysi; tum amplitudine doctrinæ, quam complectitur. Sub quatuor enim enuntiatis capitibus catholicum dogma,

quis sit, quid sit, quomodo sit, ad quid sit Christus, declarandum sistitur in continenti oppositione ad quatuor errorum classes, ad quas fere revocantur hæreses circa christologiam hucusque exortæ, vel quæ oriri posse videntur."

As in "de Deo Trino," so here, the teaching of Gunther's school, condemned by the Holy See, is compared with the dogmatic teaching of the Church, and with the principles of sound philosophy, and is shown to be in opposition to both. The revelations made by our author on the state of theology in certain German circles, calling themselves Catholic, will probably astonish some of our readers. In Thesis xxiv. (sect. iii. cap. ii. p. 202, sqq.) there is a scathing exposure of one of Gunther's disciples. It would hardly be believed, if the fact were not beyond all doubt, that a certain professor of theology" deliberately, and in print, appealed in support of his unsound teaching on the hypostatic union to a plainly Nestorian creed (the composition of Theodore of Mopsuestia) inserted in the first Act of the Council of Chalcedon, and condemned by that Council as well as by others. And another of the same hopeful school followed Dr. Baltzer (the illustrious professor's name ought not to be concealed), in order, we suppose, to keep that theologian in countenance, and lay the foundation of an extrinsic probability. We hear a good deal in England, from many Protestants, and from a handful of soi-disant Catholics, of German science, German erudition, German industry, thoroughness, and we know not what marvellous qualities besides. This incident is a curious commentary on a great deal of tall talk. It appears that Church history and the penny catechism, at all events, are not yet included within the "object" of German infallibility.

We should like to call the reader's special attention to the discussion on the real nature of hypostasis, and its application to the doctrine of the hypostatic union (sect. iii. cap. iii. thesis xxvi., sqq.). F. Franzelin takes the view which is, we believe, commonly called the Scotist. He shows very clearly, and at the same time in a manner easy to be understood, that the suppositum or hypostasis is not a modal entity superadded to the nature, already complete, but is simply the note of totality, by which a thing becomes perfect in itself and distinct from everything else. He also claims, and satisfactorily, as we think, S. Thomas for the same side.

In connection with the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, we commend to the reader the analysis of the greater part of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the fourth section (cap. ii. thes. xlviii. li.). The true interpretation and punctuation of Rom. ix. 5 (qui est super omnia Deus benedictus in sæcula) is also triumphantly vindicated against Wetstein's attempt to evade its force as a testimony to the divinity of Christ (sect. i. thes. ix.). The present volume is uniform with those which preceded it. The paper and type are excellent. There are unfortunately too many, though happily not grave, typographical errors.

Conversations on Liberalism and the Church. By O. A. BROWNSON, LL.D. New York: 1870.

IN

N an article on "Theological Errors of the Day," which appeared in our number for January, 1864, Dr. Brownson holds the place of central figure, as one in whose later writings a large proportion of those errors had been from time to time given to the world, accepted and endorsed by himself. Such of our readers as took the trouble of reading that article must have perceived that, while we did not spare the aberrations of the able and eloquent journalist, we, from first to last, drew a marked distinction between him and the mass of other tainted writers whom we there named or alluded to. We throughout desired to treat him with as much respect and tenderness as was compatible with an earnest effort to defend the cause of sacred truth. We ascribed his deviations from the old and royal path partly to an ill-regulated zeal for the conversion of non-Catholics, but principally to a new and too close and confiding familiarity with a set of scribes, immeasurably his own inferiors in every high and ennobling quality of head and heart. At the very outset of our strictures we stated, in the most explicit terms, our firm conviction of his subjective orthodoxy, and our entire acceptance of his repeated protestations to that effect.

Very soon after the appearance of that article, we learned that the celeorated"Quarterly Review," which had borne his name so many years, ceased exist. From that time we had not the pleasure of reading any production from his ready and vigorous pen. While our last number was issuing from the press we heard, and heard with unbounded delight, the double good news, that a new work of Dr. Brownson's on a most important subject had been published, and that it was altogether on the right side. We lost no time in procuring the volume; and, having got it into our hands, we read it through at once, swallowing it at a single gulp. The task was easy, for the volume is a small one; but had it been ten times as large the labour would not have been less a labour of love. In point of composition it is fully equal to any of his previous essays. In strong, clear, acute reasoning we cannot remember any one of them that we would put on a level with it. Then, sensitive as are our theological nerves, we did not meet, from beginning to end, a single objectionable sentence, or phrase, or word. There is, moreover, a total absence of those exaggerations and hasty judgments which used occasionally to offend the sense of thoughtful and dispassionate readers. In the following passage of his short preface Dr. Brownson strikes the key-note of the whole volume, and, no doubt of all his future writings :-"The doctrine is, I believe, rigidly orthodox. have sought neither to offend the world nor to conciliate it. I do not believe in making concessions of what is not mine to concede. I have explained the teachings of the Church where they conflict with the spirit of the age; but I have not sought to conform them to that spirit. The Church was instituted by our Lord to govern the world according to the Divine Reason and Will, not to be governed by it." These words contain truths

I

of the deepest moment, and point out the one unerring principle of thought and action in all things, wherein the wisdom of this world and the wisdom of the Gospel, as interpreted by the Church, come into contact.

Both the book and the subject are too important not to demand a more lengthened and elaborate reviewal than we can now devote to them. This we reserve for a future occasion-probably our next issue. But we have felt it a duty not to let the present number pass through our hands without publishing the glad tidings we have just communicated to our readers. To give, however, some idea of Dr. Brownson's method and line of procedure, we may briefly say here that the work is chiefly made up of dialogue, carried on between an elderly Catholic clergyman and an American "able editor." The parties meet at a retired watering-place, and are thus introduced :—

"While at the spring . . . . I formed the acquaintance of several gentlemen, whose conversation interested me much. Among them were two who particularly attracted my attention. One, many years the elder, was apparently a minister or priest, with a quiet and unobtrusive manner, evidently a man of foreign birth and education, but speaking English as if it had been his native tongue. He must have been at least three score and ten; but his form was erect and his eye undimmed, his natural strength unabated, and his voice unbroken, sweet, melodious, and sympathetic. He had for me a singular attraction, and I felt prepossessed in his favour at first sight. The other was an active, energetic man, under middle age, well made, with dark hair, heavy brows, and sharp, restless black eyes. His manner was not rude, but brisk and a little imperious, and he spoke always in a bold, confident tone, from which no appeal might be taken. He gave always his opinion promptly and unhesitatingly on any and every subject that came up, and seemed to have left no subject in law, politics, theology, literature, science, or art, on which he was not competent to pass a final judgment. It is hardly necessary to add, that he was the chief editor of a leading metropolitan journal.

"The two gentlemen were much together, and seemed to take no little interest in each other, although I could not discover that any topic was ever broached between them on which they did not disagree very essentially. Their conversation, or rather their discussion, attracted me as a listener, at first as drawing off my thoughts from myself, and afterwards by the interest it awakened in the subjects on which it chiefly turned, and I seldom failed to hear it. Other guests seemed as much attracted as myself, and whenever we saw them seated under the shade of the old maple-trees left standing near our hotel, we formed a ring round them, and sat and listened in silence.

"The editor was a man of our times, animated by the spirit of the age, and a firm believer in our glorious nineteenth century. The great objection, Father,' said he one day to the priest, as I soon learned he was, 'to the Church, is her unprogressive character. She fails to keep religion up with the times, refuses to advance with modern society, and the world goes on without her.'

"Whither?' quietly asked the priest.

"Whither? Why, on its progressive march.'

"Do you mean that the Church herself is not progressive, or that she opposes progress in individuals and society?'

"Both. The Church is stationary, remains what she was in the Dark Ages, does her best to keep society back where it was a thousand years ago, and to prevent the human race from taking a step forward.' "There is, I suppose, no doubt of that?'