from his theory of Infallibility, the falsity of the conclusion serves to prove that there is falsity in the premisses. If it is incredible that Christ should leave His people exposed to the risk of error in matters of speculation, it is incredible also that He would leave them exposed to the risk of going wrong in practical matters. If there is an infallible guide to tell us how to believe, that guide ought to be able to tell us also how we are to act. It is impossible to make a separation between faith and morals. Ultramontanes are only consistent in saying that he who governs the one must also have dominion over the other. But he whom we recognize as able to give us unerring guidance in practical matters is, in truth, the ruler of Life. His advice avails more with us than the commands of any person whatever. If there be, then, any such infallible guide upon earth, every secular power which does not itself submit to it and frame its laws according to its dictates, must rightly regard it as an enemy. For if the infallible authority does its duty it must scrutinize every ordinance of the secular power in order to ascertain whether that law directly or indirectly affects the welfare of the souls of the people. But there are few questions with which legislators deal which do not come under this description. For instance, this authority has claimed-and, on its own principles, rightly claimed-to pronounce upon toleration, civil liberty, education, marriage: nay, it clearly would not travel out of its province if it pronounced on the lawfulness of any foreign war, nor if it directed subjects to vindicate their rights by rebellion. It is argued, then, that if Christ did not see fit to complete His scheme by giving His vicar upon earth temporal power as well as spiritual, that vicar would be left exposed to suffer from temporal governments such measures of expulsion or repression as the rulers of any country deal to those who will not submit to the law of the land.

But the Popes have had the opportunity of working out their theory of a necessity of temporal power, and have brought it to miserable failure. Not only did they destroy the temporal prosperity of the states they governed, but they

XXIII.]

ITS PRACTICAL RESULTS.

469

impaired their own spiritual influence through the hatred inspired by the character of their rule. The Pope might drive through any part of heretic London, and be sure of a courteous reception: but the last two Popes have thought it necessary to shut themselves up in their own palace, through alleged fear, if they stirred out of it, of meeting insults from their countrymen who ought to know them best. Now, men who have themselves made such a poor hand at governing are clearly not fit to teach others how to govern; and therefore we may safely reject the Pope's claim to interfere with secular princes in their government of their states. And this claim is, as we have seen, inseparably connected with the Pope's general claim to Infallibility, so that we arrive once more at the result that we have no right to think that Christ has provided us with any infallible security for right thinking or right doing, or taught us any other way for attaining these ends than the prayerful use of the means He has given us for the education of our own reason and conscience.

APPENDIX.

DECREES OF THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

1. CONSTITUTIO DOGMATICA DE FIDE CATHOLICA.

II. CANONES.

III. CONSTITUTIO DOGMATICA PRIMA DE ECCLESIA CHRISTI.

IV. SUSPENSIO CONCILII.