cassocks, cottas, black stoles with silver crosses and birettas. On the coffin lay a large cross of flowers with wheat ears and grapes intertwined. The officiating clergy and mourners followed. Slowly the procession moved round the old quadrangle, with solemn chant and up-borne cross, down through the principal entrance to the street of the town. Here every inch of space was occupied, and every upper window filled, with reverent spectators, while Psalms 121, 122, and 124 were sung. Most of the shops were closed, and a large majority appeared in mourning. With measured tread the remains of one whom the townspeople had learned to respect, were taken to their last resting-place. The Service for the Dead was said in the parish church, which the Vicar had kindly placed at the disposal of the friends of the deceased. Canon Haskoll sang it, Dr. Littledale reading the Lesson. The church was thronged by a reverent congregation. after which the procession wended its way to the grave at the easternmost extremity of the churchyard. The arrangements, under the direction of Mr. Akers and an assistant, were complete. Seldom have we witnessed so touching a scene, as when surrounded by the Sisters of the Order he himself had originated, by the orphans who had lost a true friend, by his immediate relatives, and nearly 250 in religious habit or official garb, the prayer of intercession and the wail of loss or word of hope was chanted round the open grave. At the close of the service, his own beautiful translation, "Brief life is here our portion" was sung, and then all in turn took a last look at the coffin resting there, while the sparkling cross at the foot of the grave seemed to tell of a resurrection and a triumph: There grief is turned to pleasure, Such pleasure as below No human voice can utter, No human heart can know ; And after fleshly scandal, And after this world's night, And after storm and whirlwind, So was buried John Mason Neale, one of the profoundest scholars amongst the English clergy. He was not a D.D. of his own University of Cambridge, and, like John Keble, he was unrecognised by Church authorities and State officials. He lived and died the Warden of a Seventeenth-century almshouse. value £27 a year. His name was known in Russia, in Greece, in Germany, in America, at Rome. Foreigners sought his correspondence, Orientals and Occidentals valued his profound learning. The Church of England has mightily benefited by his teaching, yet found no preferment for him. But now he is at peace." We earnestly commend to our readers' attention an advertise ment which may be found in the present number, from which it will be seen that a committee is being formed to complete the convent buildings at East Grinstead, as a special memorial of this venerated priest. We would most strongly urge all who have benefited by his teaching, all who have used his hymns, all who reverence his name, patience, and devotion, to contribute towards so worthy and important an object. Nothing, as his friend Dr. Littledale has publicly testified, would have been more full of consolation to him in lifetime than to have been assured that Catholics would come forward at once to complete the noble work of erecting a suitable building for the religious of the Order he founded and loved. Let this therefore be done, in the Name and Patience of Jesus, and in honour of a faithful servant; and let it be done quickly. LITERARY NOTICES. SOME twenty years ago Mr. Allies, being then examining chaplain to Bishop Blomfield and rector of Launton, published an able and exhaustive work to clear the Church of England from the charge of schism. He has published some three or four smaller works and pamphlets as a Roman Catholic, in reply to it, the last of which is now lying before us; as well as a clever but rather indiscriminate panegyric on the Early Church, called the Foundation of Christendom, in which the relative influences of Christian and Pagan civilization are contrasted in the persons of one of the greatest of Christian saints and one of the feeblest and vainest egotists, albeit a consummate orator, who ever took rank among the celebrities of classical literature. On the whole we cannot congratulate him on an increase either of logical precision or of candour since his conversion to Rome. His last brochure, Dr. Pusey and the Ancient Church, (London: Longmans,) is intended to prove, from the threadbare analogy of the Donatists, the schismatic position of the English Church. Cardinal Wiseman had said all there was to be said on that score many years ago in the Dublin Review, and Dr. Newman answered him in the British Critic. It is not easy to see for what class of readers the present pamphlet was written. Those who are already convinced that Anglicans are in schism will not gain much by being reminded that the Donatists were in schism fourteen centuries before them and those who do not believe that Anglicans became schismatics by rejecting one thing will not be convinced of it by an elaborate demonstration that the Donatists became schismatics by rejecting quite another. Yet this is what Mr. Allies' argument comes to. He urges at great length, and with considerable parade of patristic learning, two points which no tolerably-instructed Anglican would think of disputing: (1) that schism is a great sin and (where it is wilful) hinders the grace of the sacraments; (2) that, in S. Augustine's words, to "separate without cause from the unity of the whole world" is schism. Dr. Pusey would say just the What Mr. Allies had to show was- (1) that the English Church separated "without cause" from the Roman; or, which would come practically to much the same thing, (2) that any separation from the See of Rome involves, ipso facto, the guilt of schism. But on the former point, " from which," says S. Augustine, "the most regularly constituted inquiry must same. : 66 66 66 start-why the schism was made?" he says nothing at all, and of course the Fathers, whom he quotes, can say nothing. On the second point he says very little, and his authorities still less. The whole force of S. Augustine's argument against the Donatists lies in the fact that they are not in peace with the people of God, which is spread over the whole world, and do not recognise in men the baptism of Christ," i. e. that they had isolated themselves, and that for a mere whim, from the rest of Christendom; and regarded all but their own sect as excommunicate. This is urged in a hundred various forms. They are divided from "the Catholic Church, spread over the whole world," the unity of believers," "the Church beyond the sea,' the Bishops of the Churches beyond the sea," "the communion of the whole world," "the Bishops beyond the sea," "a Church spread over the whole world:" similar passages abound. Now there is nothing here about separation from the Pope. It is true S. Augustine accuses the Donatists of not holding the Head of the Church," but he repeatedly explains that the Head is Christ. 46 The Head is Jesus Christ Himself. His Body is the Church." It is true again that he speaks of their separation from "the Bishops beyond the sea;" but it is the most arbitrary assumption of Mr. Allies' that this is a synonym for the Bishop of Rome. It is obviously a synonym for the whole Episcopate beyond the limits of Africa. The pith of S. Augustine's argument therefore is contained in the famous aphorism we have heard so much about of late, Securus judicat orbis terrarum; and the backbone of that argument is broken as applied to Anglicanism by the fact that the orbis, from which it is divided, is also divided against itself by the separation of East and West, not to add that the Anglican Church, including its dependencies, unlike Donatism, is spread over the whole world," though numerically smaller than its Greek or Roman sisters; nor does it share the other Donatist mark of schism by refusing "to recognise in men the baptism of Christ." And Mr. Allies, who had quoted S. Augustine's charge of exclusiveness against the Donatists, actually sees in the Anglican repudiation of that exclusiveness "a much more absolute and radical denial of our Lord's truth and honour!" In his eyes there is something respectable in a claim, however preposterous, to unchurch all your neighbours; yet S. Augustine saw in it a principal evidence of schism. This is blowing hot and cold. with a vengeance. We come lastly to those few passages in Mr. Allies' extracts which have some bearing on the controversy between England and Rome, and speak of "what is due to the Apostolic See." The strongest of them is that where S. Augustine mentions the Bishop of Carthage being "united by letters of Communion both with the Roman Church, in which the Principate of the Apostolic See hath ever been in force, and VOL. IV. 66 2 R with the other lands whence the Gospel came to Africa itself," i.e., as he explains elsewhere, "the Eastern Churches." It is obvious, in the first place, that communion with Rome is not here made, what Mr. Ailies would make it, the one exclusive test of Church membership, but is put precisely on a par with communion with the East. The Roman See however enjoyed a peculiar dignity as the one "Apostolic See" of the West (the one, that is, known to have been founded by an Apostle), and was admitted on all hands, as it is now admitted by Dr. Pusey, to have the Primacy. But no one has pointed out more clearly and learnedly than Mr. Allies, in The Church of England Cleared from the Charge of Schism, the fundamental distinction between the primacy recognised in the Early Church and the claim to universal and supreme jurisdiction over the whole of Christendom, which has for many centuries been made in the name of the Roman Pontiffs, and which the Church of England rejected at the Reformation. Till he has answered his own argument, and he has never done so yet, it is idle, and worse than idle, to adduce evidence of the former claim in proof of the latter, which is totally different, not only in degree but in kind. Whether the modern supremacy in its extremest form is a proper development of the early primacy is a perfectly legiti mate subject of inquiry; but it cannot be assumed without inquiry, for the two things are as unlike as chalk and cheese. And beyond a few pages of vague declamation the question is not touched upon here. Mr. Allies admits that S. Augustine did not fully comprehend what was contained in the Princi pate of the Apostolic Chair of Peter;" and he dwells with unction on the "long process of unifying the Church's power" which has gone on under its sway. Very true, as regards the medieval Latin Church. But he forgets that this "unifying process" resulted in the separation, first of the East, then of the northern nations from her Communion; and in both cases the papal claims, very different from any urged by S. Augustine, were the main cause of the rupture. Of the intense personal bitterness, to use no harsher term, with which Mr. Allies, both here and in his recent letter to Dr. Pusey in the Dublin Review, thinks it fitting to assail the venerable and venerated author of the Eirenicon, who was formerly his friend and counsellor, who is his senior in years, and as immeasurably his superior in learning as in Christian charity (though denounced by him as "devoid of the charity of God") the less said the better. It was perhaps an inevitable consequence of the method of treatment he has adopted that his pamphlet, notwithstanding occasional flashes of brilliant pungency, is one of the dullest we ever read. 66 The Profits of Panics, showing how Financial Storms arise, who make money by them, who are the losers, and other Revelations of a |