The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Volume 1, June 1865

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Volume 1, June 1865

Release date: August 11, 2011 [eBook #37044]
Most recently updated: January 8, 2021

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Bryan Ness, David Garcia and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD, VOLUME 1, JUNE 1865 ***

THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD.

JUNE, 1865.

BLESSED THADDEUS, BISHOP OF CORK AND CLOYNE.
THE HISTORY OF A CONVERSION.
TWO ILLUSTRIOUS GRAVES.
LITURGICAL QUESTIONS.
CORRESPONDENCE.
DOCUMENTS.
NOTICES OF BOOKS.
FOOTNOTES.

BLESSED THADDEUS, BISHOP OF CORK AND CLOYNE.

A.D. 1492.

The interesting and very learned article which appeared in the last number of the Record 1 has contributed much to illustrate the life of the Blessed Thaddeus, and to make known to the Irish Church a distinguished prelate whose virtues and sanctity adorned our island towards the close of the fifteenth century, which is precisely one of the darkest eras of our history. As, however, some of the writer's conclusions can scarcely be reconciled with the statement which we made in a preceding article on the Bishops of Cork and Cloyne (Record, p. 312), viz., that this holy Bishop's name was 'Thaddeus Machar or Maher', we take the liberty of laying before the reader the reasons on which our opinion was based, and which compel us, however unwilling, to exclude from the princely family of the M'Carthys the saintly prelate whose relics now enrich the cathedral of Ivrea.

1. The town of Ivrea, to use the learned writer's words, is the capital of the Piedmontese province of the same name, and we may add that it is most picturesquely situated at the foot of the Alps, and is one of the first Italian towns which the traveller meets when, having crossed Mount St. Bernard, he wends his way towards Vercelli or Novara. In medieval documents Ivrea receives the Latin names of Eporedia, Iporegia, and Hipporegia, as may be seen in Ughelli's Italia Sacra, or in the later work of Cappalletti, 'Le Chiese d'Italia' (Venice, 1858, vol. xiv., pag. 177), and at the time of which we speak, the see was held by Nicholas Garigliati, who was appointed its bishop in 1483, and died in 1499.

2. That the Blessed Thaddeus, who by his sanctity and miracles merited to be numbered amongst the patrons of Ivrea, was Bishop of Cork and Cloyne, is beyond all controversy. To the arguments advanced by the writer in the last Record we may add an extract from the Todd MSS. given by Brady in his Records of Cork (vol. iii. pag. 44), in which Bishop Thaddeus, who was appointed to the see of Cork in 1490, is said to have "died at the town of Eporedia in Piedmont in 1492". The date 4th October, is indeed added, but this is probably a mere misprint for the 24th October, the true date of the demise of our holy bishop.

3. Ware informs us that this Thaddeus was by some called Mechar (pag. 563), and the documents of Ivrea place beyond doubt that such was his true name. Thus the Bishop of Ivrea writes, "Thaddaeum Machar, 2 Episcopum Hib. illum esse innotuit ex chartis quas deferebat", and the old parchment record to which the same bishop refers, apparently quoting from the inscription on his tomb, describes our Blessed Thaddeus as,

"Regia progenies alto de sanguine Machar".

Now the learned editors of the Martyrology of Donegal inform us that the name Mechar is the same as the O'Meachair which appears so often in the ancient monuments of our history (see Martyr. of Donegal, published by I. A. S. 1864, pag. 517), and which at the present day has assumed the Anglicized forms of Meagher and Maher.

4. The ancient Latin verses published in the Record, 3 present two important data for determining the family to which this bishop belonged. One is his native district, which is called Solum Cariense: the other is the royal ancestry to which his family had a just and ancient claim: "Regia progenies alto de sanguine Machar". Now are these data verified in the family of the O'Meachair? if not, it must be admitted that it can have no claim to our holy bishop; but if, on the other hand, those data accurately agree with what the ancient monuments of our island attest regarding the sept of the O'Meachairs, we must conclude that no link is wanting in the chain of evidence, and that the Blessed Thaddeus has justly been referred to that distinguished family.

5. Nothing now remains but to cite some few passages from our early writers which serve to illustrate these points in the history of the O'Meachairs.

In the first place, the topographical poem of O'Huidhrin (who died in 1420) has one important passage which not only throws some light on the family name, but moreover points to the territory of Ui-Cairin as the chief abode of the O'Mahers, precisely as the name Carinum in the Latin poem cited above marks the native district of our holy Bishop Thaddeus. The translation of this poem of O'Huidhrin was the last work achieved by our illustrious O'Donovan, and was published by the I. A. S. in 1862. At page 133 we find the following verse:—

"Mightily have they filled the land

The O'Meachairs—the territory of Ui-Cairin

A tribe at the foot of Bearnan Eile;

It is no shame to celebrate their triumph".

To which lines O'Donovan adds the following notes:

"The O'Meachairs. The name of this family is now Anglicized O'Meagher, but more generally Meagher or Maher, without the prefix O'. Their territory of Ui-Cairin is now called Ikerrin, and is a barony in the present county of Tipperary.

"Bearnan Eile, i.e. the gapped mountain of Ely, now called in English the Devil's-Bit Mountain"—(Notes, page lxxxv., n. 71 and 72.)

6. In the Leabhar na-Ceart, edited by the same distinguished Irish antiquary, for the Celtic Society, in 1847, we find some additional evidence not only for the connexion of the O'Meachars with the territory of Ui-Cairin, but also for the royal descent to which they laid claim. It is thus that Leabhar-na-Ceart commemorates the tributes which were due to the king of Eile:—

"Eight steeds to the king of Eile, of the gold

Eight shields, eight swords are due,

Eight drinking-horns to be used at the feast,

Eight coats of mail in the day of bravery"—(pag. 79.)

To which verse O'Donovan adds the following note:—

"Eile. This was the name of a tribe and an extensive territory, all in the ancient Mumha or Munster. They derived the name from Eile, the seventh in descent from Cian, the son of Oilioll-Ollum ... The ancient Eile comprised the whole of Eile Ui-Chearbhail, which is now included in the King's County ... and also the baronies of Ikerrin and Elyogarty in the county of Tipperary.... Ikerrin and Elyogarty were detached from O'Chearbhail shortly after the English invasion, and added to Ormond, but the native chieftains O'Meachair, i.e. O'Meagher, and O'Fogartaigh, i.e. O'Fogarty, were left in possession".

7. We will not fatigue the reader by citing a long series of authorities in which similar statements recur. Two will suffice for all, and we shall take them from the works of the late lamented professor of our Catholic University, Eugene O'Curry. One is a genealogical extract, in which Michael O'Clery, the chief of the 'Four Masters', commemorates some of the most illustrious families of the Milesian race. From Heber, he says, the Son of Milesius, were descended thirty of the kings of Ireland, and sixty-one saints. Amongst these royal chieftains must be reckoned Teadgh (i.e. Thaddeus), grandson of Oiliol Ollum, and he adds:

"The descendants of this Teadgh branched out and inhabited various parts throughout Ireland, namely, the race of Cormac Gaileng, in Luighne Connacht, the two Ui-Eaghra in Connacht, the O'Eaghra of the Ruta, O'Chearbhaill of Eile.—O'Meachara in Ui-Cairin, and O'Conor, etc". (Curry's Lectures, etc., pag. 147).

The other extract to which we wish to refer is published in the Appendix to the 'Battle of Magh Rath', which was translated and edited for the Celtic Society by the same great Irish scholar in 1855. The eighth genealogical Table (pag. 175) in this work, extracted "from O'Clery's Pedigrees, and Mac Firbis", tells us that "Mechair, from whom O'Meachair or Meagher", was fourteenth in descent from Oiliol Ollum, and the following note of O'Clery is added to his name:—

"There is a steed and a suit of clothes from each new chief of them to the Comharba of St. Cronan of Roscrea, together with Innisnambeo; and he (the Comharba) is to go around the chief to proclaim him chief; and the Comharba is entitled to sit at his shoulder, and the chief should stand up at his approach: and this Meachair was King of Eile".

From all this we are surely justified in concluding that the historic date of solum Cariense and regia progenies are precisely those which we should expect to find in a commemoration of an illustrious member of the family of the O'Mahers. 4

8. Our holy bishop, though thus descended from the first monarch of our island, wished, when journeying from Rome, to enter as a pilgrim the public hospital of St. Anthony in Ivrea, and there, in the true evangelical spirit, rejoiced in being reckoned the poorest of the poor. Heaven, however, has decreed that the humble shall be exalted; and no sooner had the unknown traveller closed his eyes to this world, than a divine light filled the room in which he lay; several prodigies awakened the devotion of the faithful, and proclaimed his sanctity; and the clergy and laity in solemn procession bore his hallowed remains to the cathedral church, and numbered him amongst the patrons of that ancient see. Thus, again, was Dr. Thaddeus true to the traditions of his family; for, besides his royal descent, he could boast of the higher and nobler lineage of sanctity. In the Martyrology of Donegal we find the names of two members of the family whose festivals were celebrated on January 16th and September 6th. Colgan, too, speaks of a Saint Mecharius, whose life he had prepared for publication, and whose feast was marked for the 13th of November (AA. SS., pag. 756).

Dr. Reeves also informs us that a St. Machar, better known by the Irish appellation of Mochonna, was sent by St. Columba with twelve companions to preach the Gospel to the Picts, and subsequently became the patron saint of Aberdeen (Adamman's Columba, pag. 246, 289, 299, etc.). On a fly-leaf of the original MS. of the Martyrology of Donegal, in the handwriting of O'Clery or Colgan, a Saint Murro is commemorated, with the addition, "id est, Machare, seu Meacharius", and the interesting fact is further commemorated: "quod feras bestias subjugavit et triduo defunctum ad vitam revocavit" (Martyr. Doneg., I. A. S., xlvi.).

We do not wish, however, to leave unanswered the difficulty which the words of Ware present against our interpretation of this holy bishop's name. He expressly styles this bishop "Thady M'Carthy, by some called Mechar". Here then we must remark that Ware does not identify these names; and the name Mechar, which, as Ware acknowledges, was by some authorities given to this bishop, is proved by the monuments of Ivrea to have been his true name. What then was the origin of Ware's mistake? We learn from the Monumenta Vaticana (pag. 503), that there was about this time a Thaddeus Mac Carryg "iniquitatis filius", who endeavoured to intrude himself into the see of Ross, and who is erroneously ranked by Ware amongst the bishops of that see (see Record, No. iii., December, 1864). As that name resembles Mac Carrha or Mac Carthaigh, the Irish forms of Mac Carthy, it seems not improbable that Ware, by one of his so-frequent errors, confounded our holy Bishop Thaddeus with that iniquitous usurper (see Dublin Review, April, 1865, p. 384).

10. Perhaps we have here again a clue to the difficulties which compelled Bishop Thaddeus to abandon his see for a while, and seek a refuge in Rome. When appointed in 1490, several retainers of the Desmond family refused to admit him to the possession of the temporalities of his see (see Record, pag. 312). Now it was precisely in 1488 or 1489 that Thady M'Carthy had been compelled by the repeated censures of Rome to surrender the temporalities of Ross to the canonically appointed Bishop Odo; and what more natural than that the same genius of evil should, on the vacancy of the adjoining diocese in the following year, stir up again the embers of discord, and endeavour through his kinsmen to obtain possession of this see at least? And as the Protestant historian reckoned the usurper of the temporalities of Ross amongst the canonical successors of St. Fachinan, so, by a somewhat similar mistake, he may have easily confounded the same Thaddeus M'Carryg with the holy bishop who canonically ruled the united sees of Cloyne and Cork.

11. It now remains to make a few other remarks on the interesting paper published in the last Record.

In the first place, there are some incidental errors which seem to be inadvertently introduced. At pag. 379, Richard Wolsey is commemorated as successor of Thady, Bishop of Down, who died in 1486, which opinion has long since been set aside by De Burgo and Dr. Reeves (Eccles. Antiquities, Dublin, 1847, pag. 257). Thady, Bishop of Ross, is also said to have died soon after his appointment in 1488, and to have had for his successor Bishop Odo in 1489. All this has been sufficiently refuted in a former number of the Record (pag. 106) and in the Dublin Review for April, pag. 384.

At pag. 380-1, our Blessed Thaddeus is identified with a distinguished member of the Augustinian order, named Thaddeus de Hipporegia, who is eulogized as "a man distinguished for learning, religious observance, preaching, holiness of life, and experience, a man of great zeal, and a sedulous promoter of the interests of his order". We should be glad, indeed, to be able to number amongst our countrymen this great ornament of the Augustinian body. Unfortunately, however, the historians of that order represent this Thaddeus, not as an Irishman, but as an Italian, whose surname points to the town or province of Ivrea (see above No. 1) as the place of his nativity. The article in the Record adds: "True, Elsius gives 1502 for the date of the friar's demise; but Elsius is never to be trusted in dates, and the printer may easily take MCCCCXCII. (the true date) for MCCCCCII". This is very plausible; but unfortunately here again there is no foundation for such reasoning, and hence the whole fabric falls to the ground. Elsius does not assign 1502, as the date of the friar's death; he merely writes "floruit usque ad annum 1502" (Encom. Augustin., Brussels, 1654, pag. 645). He, however, refers to Herrera for further information; turning to whose work we find thus explained the last formula of Elsius: "Durat ejus memoria usque ad an. 1502 in quo, habita Ferrariae synodo, Vicarius Congregationis acclamatus est. Nulla ultra illius in actis consistorialibus mentio", (Alphab. Augustin., vol. ii. pag. 450): and in a later Spanish compendium of this work, made by Herrera himself, it is said that this Thaddeus probably died in 1503, no mention being made of him in the acts of the order subsequent to the synod of Ferrara, held in the preceding year. There is also another circumstance equally fatal to the above theory. The illustrious Augustinian held many high offices in his order, and the historians Elsius and Herrera give the minutest details concerning them: "He was seven times definitor, (they write), thirteen times visitator, four times president of their congregations, nine times vicarius-generalis", etc, but both are careful to exclude him from the list of bishops of the order. There is, therefore, no one point of contact between the distinguished Augustinian friar Thaddeus, and our holy Bishop of Cloyne.

12. To prove that the Solum Cariense might justly be referred to in the eulogy or epitaph of a Bishop M'Carthy, it is interpreted as referring to Kerry, the burial place of that family. However, neither the Irish form of the name of that territory, i.e. Chiarr (as we learn from the Record, page 380) nor the only Latin name by which we have seen it designated in mediaeval records, i.e. Cherrium, can be said to have much affinity with the Cariense of the ancient document of Ivrea. We may also add that, were reference made to the burial place of the princely family of the M'Carthys, we should rather expect to find commemorated Muckross or Innisfallen, than the generic name of the vast territory of Kerry.

13. As regards the name Machara or Mechar, it is said that the Irish name MacCarthy, is pronounced Maccaura, with the last syllable short, as in Ardmagha, and numberless like words. Hence, Wadding, in speaking of the foundation of Muckross Abbey, Killarney, by Domnall M'Carthy, Prince of Desmond, quotes to this effect a bull of Paul II. in 1468, in which Domnall's name is spelled "Machar" (p. 379). This example from the bull of Pope Paul II. is evidently a mere typographical error. In the edition of Wadding's Annals to which the writer refers (Roman edit., tom. xiii., p. 558, seq.), that error stands side by side with Desimonia and Aertferten, and what is still worse, Wadding in his text, citing this passage, is made to say: "Refert in hoc diplomate pontifex, inchoatum fuisse a Donaldo Mac-Lare" (p. 432). The origin of these errors is, that the transcripts of the Pontifical letters were made by strangers to our language, and the Roman edition of Wadding did not appear until sixty years after his death. In the original edition of the work, however, which was printed under the revision of Bonaventure Baron and other Irish Franciscans, Wadding's text gives us the true Latin form of the name: "Refert in hoc diplomate pontifex inchoatum fuisse a Donaldo Mac-Care" (1st edit. Lugduni, 1648, tom. vi. p. 693), and elsewhere speaking of the same convent of Muckross, he says its founder was "Magnus Carthagus", Prince of Desmond. Indeed, the Latin form of the name M'Carthy is not one about which we should have much dispute; it occurs a thousand times in the works of O'Sullivan Beare, Dr. Roothe, and other Irish writers, and yet nowhere is it found expressed under that form which the name of the Blessed Thaddeus presents to us.

Whilst, however, we thus dissent from some of the conclusions of the learned writer in the Record for May, we wish to convey to him our sincere acknowledgments for having so prominently brought before the Irish public the name, too long forgotten, of one of our sainted Bishops, under whose protection we may hope that our holy faith will ever prosper, not only in our own island, but also in that now suffering province where his relics are enshrined.

THE HISTORY OF A CONVERSION.

The department of religious literature, which is made up of histories of individual conversions to the faith, has received of late years many remarkable additions. This class of literature is regulated in its growth by very peculiar conditions, and must be judged according to exceptional laws. Its subject—the mysterious workings of grace in the soul—is such as rather to impose a reverent silence than to invite fulness of description; and so well do elevated souls appreciate the sacredness of such silence, that, except for interests of religion or justice, they are unwilling to bring before men those inner secrets of their hearts. But when the interests of religion or justice have convinced them that silence is no longer a duty, the history they consent to unfold can rarely be other than attractive and profitable, seeing that it describes a human soul's toilsome journey from error to truth. The very minuteness of personal detail, which in any other composition would be a blot, in this becomes a merit and a charm. Among the religious motives that not unfrequently dictate such a history, a spirit of thankfulness for the blessing of faith has its fitting place. The favoured soul looks out from the shelter of its Father's house upon the perilous path it has just traversed, and gratefully traces the Providence by which its wayward feet were guided where so many strayed to their ruin; just as the rescued mariner hangs up ex voto a sketch of his frail bark in the moment of her peril, when, but for heaven's help, she would have foundered in the raging waves. Fruit of this pious gratitude is the narrative 5 we are now engaged upon; a narrative which will interest every Catholic, not only because it is the history of a remarkable conversion, but because of the light it incidentally throws on the present condition and future prospects of German Protestantism. But before we set ourselves to trace the steps of the process which led Dr. Laemmer from a many-faced Protestantism to the Catholic Church, it will be useful to make a few preliminary remarks.

In Dr. Laemmer we have a witness who has had rare opportunities of becoming acquainted with the very highest and best forms which Protestantism has been enabled to assume in the country of its birth. He is, above all things, the child of the German Protestant universities. Of the twenty-six universities of which the learned nation is so proud, six or eight are Catholic, 6 four are mixed, 7 and the remaining fourteen are exclusively Protestant. 8

Now, Dr. Laemmer was student successively at Koenigsberg, Leipsic, and Berlin universities, that is to say, at the very universities which at the present time are the chief seats of Protestant thought, both in philosophy and in theology. The leading Protestant schools in Germany are at present three in number, called respectively the neo-Lutheran, the Mediation, and the Tübingen, or historico-critical school; of these 9 the neo-Lutheran, or Lutheran reaction school, has specially existed in Berlin and Leipsic; the so called Mediation theology at Berlin; and the Tübingen school (now almost extinct in its native home, and renewed by Hilgenfeld at Jena) has made its influence felt throughout. Besides, at Koenigsberg, he came, as we shall see, under the influence of one of the ablest defenders of Hegelianism. We should exceed our limits, were we to enter upon a statement of the principles of these schools. Be it enough to say, that the first-named school, by defending the authority and credibility of the Scriptures, aims at re-constructing the historical basis of Christianity, and insists on a return to the Lutheran Confessions of the sixteenth century. Since the political troubles of 1848, an ultra-conservative party, called the Hyper-Lutheran, has arisen within this school, which goes back beyond the Reformation, and insists on the principle of a visible authoritative church, a rigid sacramental theory, and the doctrine of consubstantiation. Stahl, and Leo of Halle, to whom Dr. Laemmer makes an important allusion, to be hereafter quoted, belong to the most advanced of this party. Among the representatives of this school with whom Dr. Laemmer was brought into direct contact, were Hengstenberg and Kahnis. 10

The Mediation school takes its stand between the Lutheran party on the one hand, and the school of criticism on the other, and without going back to the principle of authority, or forward to that of discovery, proposes to unite the use of reason with belief in Scripture, and to understand what it believes. Of the members of this very numerous school Dr. Laemmer had intercourse with Twesten and Nitzch. The Tübingen school had for its leader Christian Baur, and starting from the principle that the only portions of the New Testament undoubtedly genuine are four of St. Paul's Epistles, viz.: to the Romans, to the Galatians, and the two to the Corinthians, it comes to the conclusion that Christianity in its present form is the result of the controversy between the Jewish, or Petrine, and the Pauline Christianity of the apostolic and following ages. All the other books of the New Testament it attributes to some one or other of the contending schools. That this school, extravagant as its conclusions may appear to us, is every day gaining ground in France with a very numerous party, we have been lately assured by competent authority. 11 That it has many advocates in England is well known. 12 A critic in the Home and Foreign Review 13 speaks of "the importance of those inquiries of Dr. Baur and his followers into primitive Christianity, which have in some way modified the views of almost every one who has become acquainted with them."

These are thy gods, O Israel! These are the shapes of Protestantism that wander to and fro in the various universities of Germany. Dr. Laemmer, speaking with full knowledge of the subject, sums up in one word the result of all this unhealthy movement, and that word is—chaos. And what heightens the confusion is, that, although the systems which form this chaos are in absolute and perpetual conflict with each other, yet does each professor claim for himself the exclusive possession of truth, as if he and he alone had been gifted with infallibility.

The special feature of Dr. Laemmer's conversion appears to us to consist in this, under the grace of God, that he approached faith through its historic side. Sound and conscientious historical research has been the means of his deliverance from bondage. His mind from boyhood inclined towards things grave; the details he communicates concerning his choice of authors reveal that sobriety of judgment which is the first quality of a student of history. The bent of his mind in this direction was strengthened by study of the fathers, of the history of the Papacy, and of the Catholic theology of the Reformation period. We invite special attention to the happy result of historical studies in his case, because we see in it a promise of much future good for Catholic truth in Germany. The broad distinction between the German method of the present century and that of the past, lies in this, that the nineteenth century is the age of historical inquiry, whereas the last century was that of critical thought. Even the Tübingen school is an improvement on the destructiveness of Strauss, for it admits and calls attention to the historical value of at least some portion of the Scriptures. In the other schools, above described, this tendency is of course still more marked. The modern spirit tends not so much to examine the ontological value of an opinion, as to investigate how men came to hold that opinion. It was this spirit which suggested the questions of concursus, which, as we shall see, changed the current of Dr. Laemmer's life. Now we hold it very probable that as this spirit becomes more extended, its fruits will be these: men will become familiar with the teachings of Christian antiquity; and although this knowledge may be sought not for the sake of the doctrine itself, but as a preliminary to other studies, still, such is the divine power of truth, that, once revealed to the soul, it creates therein a wondrous craving after itself, which will dispose the soul for the grace of faith. There must be at this moment many thoughtful men in Germany, who, in virtue of this spirit, are engaged in the examination of the fathers and of the theologians of the Catholic Church, and, who, finding themselves, like Dr. Laemmer, between the ruins caused by Protestantism and the unbroken strength of Catholic teaching, are even now turning their eyes towards Rome, therein to seek her who was their mother of old.

Hugh Laemmer was born of a Protestant father and a Catholic mother, at Allenstein, in Eastern Prussia, on 25th January, 1835. His mother was a woman of most fervent piety, who, in almost unceasing prayer, sought and found consolation under her many severe afflictions. It was not given her to exercise much influence over the mind of her son, who, long before her death, had gone to reside with his father's relatives, by whom he was brought up as a Protestant. The lad, nevertheless, had a tender love for his mother, and from his earliest years was conscious of an indescribable leaning towards his Catholic friends in preference to his Protestant kindred. This feeling was the natural growth of observations made by the quickwitted boy regarding the piety, firm principles, and good conduct of the Catholics. At the same time, the devotion of the faithful in their processions and pilgrimages served to put him on his guard against the bigoted prejudices which his Lutheran cousins ever sought to instil into his mind against their Catholic neighbours. When with the other schoolboys he went to church on Sunday, the sermon made no impression on him, and no wonder, for the preacher carried with him into the pulpit the chilling rationalistic principles he had imbibed at the university. Even in those early years the boy's heart tended towards the beautiful and spacious Catholic Church of his native town. Once, when his father took him to Heiligenlind (a famous resort of pilgrims), and the old sacristan showed him the rare treasures of the church, he experienced an emotion so strong that it survived even the rude trials of his after life.

In 1844 he entered the gymnasium of Koenigsberg. He brought with him from home a good stock of elementary and grammatical knowledge; and soon discovered that his tastes inclined him to the study of literature more than to that of science. Ellendt, then rector of the gymnasium, was a man who possessed in a remarkable degree the power of making his lectures interesting to his pupils. Explained by such a master, Homer and Herodotus became in a short time the favourite authors of M. Laemmer, who, on the other hand, had no taste for what he calls "the tedious narratives of the Anabasis, and the pedantic tirades of the Cyropaedia". He preferred Caesar and Livy to Cicero, whose philosophy especially he found to be commonplace. Modern French literature had no attractions for such a mind as his; the contemporary romance writers of that nation excited even his disgust. As Germany is considered by many to be the very home of perfection in classical studies, it will be interesting to hear the opinion Dr. Laemmer's experience has led him to form concerning the special dangers which beset middle school education at the present day:—

"I believe it to be a mistake", he says, "to make modern languages, mathematics, and the physical sciences occupy very much of the time appointed for the study of the classics; and as far as middle class instruction is concerned, we have reason to be grateful to the Raumer ministry for the prominence it has given in the new educational plan to the wise principle non multa, sed multum. It is highly dangerous to the young to distribute their faculties simultaneously over many heterogeneous branches of knowledge. Ubique hospes, nusquam domi: such a system is the sure path to that half-learning, which, without giving a thorough knowledge of anything, encourages young men to talk presumptuously of a host of subjects of which they have but the barest surface knowledge. What happens when the examination papers exact from students a knowledge of science as well as of literature, physics, chemistry, natural history, and the different branches of mathematics? It is a well-known fact that, with the exception of a few intended for certain professions, young men are careful to forget as soon after examination as they can, the information it has cost them so much labour to acquire. Against this it is vain to urge the importance which the natural sciences have now-a-days attained to—an importance so great that no one, save at his peril, can remain a stranger to them; for, on no account should we furnish new weapons to materialism. At most, it is required that students should be supplied with such elementary information as may enable them in the future to keep in sight the true bearings of things, and in creatures recognize Him who is proclaimed in the first article of the Creed. That extravagant cultivation of the natural sciences, so often substituted by our ministers in place of the lessons of Holy Writ, is as perilous as is the undue exaltation of man and of man's pretended victories over nature. The laws of nature have never acknowledged any master save One—our Lord Jesus Christ—and in Him the saints with whom it has pleased Him to share His sovereignty" (p. 13).

Whether the authorities at the gymnasium shared these views or not, we are not in a position to state. One thing, however, is certain,—much attention was paid there to the study of the German language and literature; much of our student's time was passed in the excellent library of German authors provided for the use of the scholars. What an eventful moment that is in which a youth, in the flush of the early vigour of his mind, finds himself for the first time in a library where the treasures of human thought are gathered before him clothed in the language he has learned from his mother's lips! Then begins for him that daily contact of mind with the mind of others, which will infallibly colour for good or evil the history of his future. He who, without an enlightened and friendly guide, adventures inexperienced upon this commerce,

"Voyaging through strange seas of thought, alone",

runs no little risk of being caught unawares by error where his generous ardour looked only for truth. In the world of books as in the world of men, evil lies very close to good, and wears its garb and mien; and how shall the inexperience of youth be able to see through the disguise, or how avoid becoming captive to its snares? And from such captivity, how harassing the toil of escape! Of that toil let him make light who has never had experience of the almost ceaseless influence erroneous principles exercise on the mind with whose growth they have grown. From reading Newton on the Prophecies in 1816, Dr. Newman, then a boy of fifteen, became convinced that the Pope was Antichrist; and his imagination was stained by the effects of this doctrine up to the year 1843. 14 Nor did M. Laemmer come away safe. His random reading brought him both good and evil, so intermingled each with each, that his unripe judgment could no more discern between them than the hand can disjoin the sunshine from the shadow that follows after it. After ransacking the bulk of German literature, he selected from out the rest certain writers to be his prime favourites. The choice he made reveals at once the bent of his mind, and the dangers to which that very bent exposed him. The schools of German poetry and taste are divided in Vilmar's History of German Literature into five classes. First, that which preceded Lessing, subdivided into the Saxon school, and the Swiss school of Wieland in his early manner; to which was akin the Göttingen school of Klopstock and Voss; second, that of Lessing and the writers influenced by him; third, the Weimar school with its three great names, Herder, Goethe, and Schiller; fourth, the later schools, the romantic, represented by the two Schlegels, Novalis, and the patriotic; fifth, the modern school of reaction against absolute government, headed by H. Heine. Of these schools, only the second and third gave M. Laemmer delight. There was a hidden sympathy between the qualities of his own mind and the exquisite critical genius and reasoning power of Lessing, which made him find the writers of the first class insipid and trivial. He came under the influence of Lessing to a remarkable degree, and if to that influence he owes the gain of an important truth, to it must be attributed also his acceptance of a most fatal error. That remarkable man, author, or, as it now appears, editor of the Wolfenbüttel Fragments, in consequence of that publication, had a warm controversy with the Lutheran pastor Göze, in which he forcibly showed, by historical arguments chiefly, that the principle of the Bible and nothing but the Bible, was illogical and false. M. Laemmer followed the course of the controversy, and found to his dismay that the arguments of Lessing had brought home to him the conviction that Lutheranism rested on a false basis. This was a great gain; but it was counter-balanced by a great loss. The ardour of his youthful admiration blinded him to the dangerous principles of indifferentism and doubt contained in his master's works, and particularly in his Education of the World. The third Fragment sets it forth as impossible, that all men should be brought to believe revelation on rational grounds. These principles, destructive of all faith and certainty in belief, were adopted by the young student, and warmly defended by him in a special dissertation.

Towards the end of his course he devoted himself to the study of Herder; and here again vague reading brought to him gain and loss, truth and falsehood together. He learned from this writer to believe in the mysterious action of Providence in the world; but the view he was led to form of the Divine plan was confined, superficial, and vague. He also gave much time to the reading of Schiller, in whose works he found an assault on the frigid deism then predominant in Germany. But, the deity which that poet brought so near to men was not the Blessed Trinity, but the gods of Olympus; and whilst his strains rebuked the philosophy which never rose above the laws of gravity, he himself did but serve the cause of epicureanism by his praises of the pleasures of the earth.

From Goethe M. Laemmer learned to appreciate, in some measure, the Sacraments of the Church, and to think kindly of the Church itself. But what solid advantage could he gain from the man who wrote to Lavater of the chief gospel miracles that "he held them for blasphemies against the great God and His revelation in nature"?

The reader will have observed that this course of reading made several important additions to M. Laemmer's religious views. And yet the books among which his reading lay were either not at all, or not directly religious. We are now to inquire how far his ideas were modified by any directly religious training. The answer to this question opens up such a view of the condition of Protestantism in the country of its birth, as well deserves our careful study. Let M. Laemmer tell us what fruits it has produced at Koenigsberg. First of all, in the various schools where he resided during his stay in that town, there was no common practice of religion: the religious exercises of the gymnasium were limited to the singing of a few stereotyped chants. The religious instruction of the students was attended to by an aged professor, who was one of the leaders of the Freemasons, and whose religion was the religion of pure reason. He was assisted in the religious training of the students by a younger man, whose doctrines were kindred with his own, and whose lectures, though erudite, were arid. Fortunately for himself, M. Laemmer had learned from his mother the habit of night and morning prayer. This habit he retained, although for want of fixed principles it became a work of mere routine. Such was the state of religion in the gymnasium. In the city itself things were still worse. From the orthodox Lutheranism of Superintendent Sartorius, down to the absolute Rationalism of Rupp, every intermediate stage of error had its exponents and followers in the city of Kant. In the eyes of Sartorius, Catholicism, which he knew only from Luther's caricatures, stood on the same level with Rationalism; he assigned to the Confession of Augsburg almost the same authority which Catholics claim for tradition, and together with Baur, Nitsch, and Winer, made an unsuccessful attempt to refute Moehler's Symbolism. Rupp, on the other hand, denounced all symbols, even that of St. Athanasius, which he declared to be incompatible with Christian doctrine; his system was based on Indifferentism of the lowest kind, and conceded to women as well as to men the right of deliberating and of teaching in religious matters. And yet, these two men, so diametrically opposed to each other in doctrine, preached for a time in the same church and from the same pulpit. And, whilst Sartorius, who revered Luther as a man of God, preached to empty benches, Rupp found assembled around him a crowded audience, composed of the highest as well as the lowest in the land. The different churches at Koenigsberg had preachers of every shade of doctrine. During the course of his studies M. Laemmer made trial of them all, but found not satisfaction in any. At length, in the midst of this Babel, he became acquainted with the man who was destined to exercise a most salutary influence on his life. That man was Lehnerdt, Superintendent-General of the province of Saxony. Born in Brandenburg, and educated at Berlin, in the school of Schleiermacher and Hegel, he escaped the pernicious influence of his masters by a profound course of historical studies. On the one hand, he combated the rationalistic exegesis of Paulus, and on the other, devoted himself with all his might to the study of the Fathers. He was a man of great piety; and in preparing M. Laemmer for confirmation, spoke with such unction of God and the world, man and sin, Christ and salvation, that his words wrought in the young student's soul a blessed reaction. An intimate and affectionate relationship sprang up between the two, which was interrupted in the middle of 1851 by Lehnerdt's departure for Berlin, where he succeeded Neander as professor of history, but was resumed again at a later period in that city.

M. Laemmer passed from the gymnasium to the university of Koenigsberg at Easter, 1852. He remained there but one year, during which time he acted as secretary to Voigt, whose able History of Gregory VII. was the beginning of a new epoch for ecclesiastical history in Germany. One of the professors of philosophy was Rosenkranz, the pupil and biographer of Hegel. This able man was an eloquent partisan of Hegelianism, and by the poetic colouring he contrived to throw around its doctrines, exercised an extraordinary influence over the youth of the university. M. Laemmer tells us that during a fever which at this time brought him to death's door, one of his keenest regrets was his inability to attend Rosenkranz's lectures. He made up for his absence from lecture by a careful study of his professor's writings, and completely adopted the views expressed therein. It was long before he was able to shake off the yoke of Hegelianism which he then assumed. In the university, Biblical literature was treated altogether from the rationalistic point of view. One of the fruits of this method is the isolated and independent study of various parts of Sacred Scripture. "It was reserved for Protestantism", says M. Laemmer, "to cultivate in minute detail what is called Biblical Theology, and to write volumes upon the doctrine of such and such an apostle in particular.... This anatomical process, this study of atoms, has led many to apply those fine theories to various periods of Church history, and, like certain heretics of the middle ages, to speak of the Christianity of St. Peter, and of the Christianity of St. Paul, not excluding by any means that of St. John" (pp. 47, 48).

At the Easter of 1853 M. Laemmer passed from the university of Koenigsberg to that of Leipsic, on a burse founded in the old Catholic times by a Catholic priest of his native town. His departure from Koenigsberg marks the close of the first period of his university career, and it will be interesting to stop and take a comprehensive view of the phases of thought through which he passed during that time. As far as religious opinions are concerned, this first stage of his life may be subdivided into two periods: one of demolition, the other of reconstruction. In the former he lost his belief in Lutheranism and its central doctrine of the Bible and nothing but the Bible; that is to say, he lost hold of the only dogmatic principle he held. Being thus deprived of a fixed belief, he was more open to the action of Lessing's principles of universal tolerance, which amounted to the coldest indifferentism and doubt. These principles he made his own for a season. The spectacle of division and discord which was exhibited daily under his eyes at Koenigsberg, helped to complete the work of destruction. Even his very prayer became a dry form, lacking all influence for good. The period of reconstruction commenced with the friendship that bound him to Lehnerdt, by whose influence were sown in his mind the seeds of a reaction, which, by the play of intellectual as well as moral causes, was afterwards developed into the fulness of Catholic belief. The intellectual cause that led to this happy result was, as we said before, the spirit of historical inquiry; the moral cause, under God's grace, was the deep religious sentiment which formed part of his original character, and which, once aroused by Lehnerdt's words about justice and the judgment to come, never allowed any antagonism of feeling to stand long in the way of his acceptance of the truth. Not that the action of these causes was at all times unimpeded. The Hegelianism which he imbibed from Rosenkranz far a long time seriously crippled his mind in its exertions after truth.

In these dispositions M. Laemmer came to the University of Leipsic.

Among the professors at Leipsic Winer was beyond doubt the most remarkable. His labours on the idioms of the New Testament Greek, his lexicological and bibliographical works, and even his reply to Moehler's Symbolism, with all their defects, give proof of solid study. But he permitted himself in his lectures to launch sarcasms against the rites of the Catholic Church. Indirectly he was the occasion of much good to M. Laemmer, who read Moehler's and other Catholics' works in order to test the statements advanced by Winer. It was Winer too who first suggested to him the idea of devoting himself to teaching in the university. Tischendorf, so famous for his studies on the Bible texts, and Wachsmuth, who has rendered immense services to truth by his Roman history, written in refutation of Niebuhr, were among the professors whose courses he followed at Leipsic. Two resolutions taken at this period by M. Laemmer reveal the gradual change which was taking place in his convictions, owing to the action of the causes mentioned above. First, he determined to assist no longer at the lectures of Theile, on account of his grossly rationalistic treatment of the doctrine of the Word in the Epistles of St. John. Theile died shortly after. "He was a man of rectitude", says M. Laemmer, "and conscientious: I cannot think of him without a feeling of deep sorrow. You might read on his brow the painful and fruitless efforts he had made to attain to the fulness of truth and to that peace which the world cannot give" (p. 65). Daily more and more disgusted with rationalism, and wearied with ineffectual efforts to reconcile the contradictions which everywhere appeared in theology, he now began to entertain serious thoughts of confining himself exclusively to philosophical studies. But these thoughts were put to flight on occasion of his first sermon, which he preached in a suburban village where one of his friends was pastor. The subject of the sermon was charity, as described by St. Paul; and its treatment had the effect of reviving in the preacher's heart his old love for religious questions. He was now approaching the crisis of his life. While he was bewildered by the endless variations of Protestantism, and endeavouring to form out of them a religious system such as would satisfy his reason and conscience, the first rays of the grace of faith began to dawn more nearly upon his soul. In what manner this came to pass we shall allow himself to tell:

"I said before that during my stay at Leipsic, the study of a question proposed for concursus exercised a powerful influence on my religious views, and that to it is to be attributed my first step towards Catholicism. The subject chosen for the concursus of 1854, by the Leipsic Faculty of Theology, was the exposition of the doctrine of Clement of Alexandria on the Word. This theme made upon me a most vivid impression. At once, and with great joy, I resolved to become a candidate. I will now state the motives of this resolve. The conflicting theological systems which I had observed, both in books and in oral instructions, occasioned me extreme torture. I was too independent to follow the example of so many others by attaching myself blindly to a party; I wished to examine for myself the successive phases undergone by the Protestant principle, and with full knowledge of the subject to make my own selection. All those systems, whether confessional or non-confessional, could not satisfy me long; on the other hand, the distraction caused by philological and philosophical studies could not give peace to my heart, which only in God could find an end to its unrest. Inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te. I felt I must escape from the chaos of modern theology, and I most eagerly availed myself of this opportunity to draw from the spring of Christian antiquity. I procured a copy of Klotz's portable edition, and set myself to the study of my author. Pen in hand, I began my task by reading him through and through before I took any account of what others had written about him.

"A new world opened on my sight as I read the earliest master of the Alexandrian Catechetical School—the teacher of Origen. What treasures lie hid in these three works, the Exhortatio ad Graecos, the Paedagogus, and the Stromata! The Exhortatio ad Graecos is a masterpiece of Christian controversy against Paganism, considered in its popular mythology, its poetry, and its philosophy. The Paedagogus, written for catechumens, sets before them a magnificent portrait of the true and only Master—the eternal Word of the Father—who has created man to His own image; who alone can provide a fitting remedy for fallen and guilty humanity; who, though man had become of the earth, earthly, yet enables him to attain to his heavenly destiny; who, in fine, confides him to the maternal yet virginal love of the Church. Then came the eight books of the Stromata, an unpretending mosaic, in which the loftiest problems of philosophy and theology are treated with great learning and rare penetration. These three works were, without doubt, connected together in the author's mind. The idea of the Word is the central point of Clement's entire demonstration; and in that idea we must seek the essential unity of his system. It is the Word which tenderly invites man; which instructs him; which guides him to his end by leading him to see the things of God in their profundity; and thus the idea of the Word embraces in one same circle all philosophy, dogmatic as well as moral" (pp. 85, 88).

The monograph on Clement of Alexandria was prefaced by prolegomena, containing a sketch of Clement's life, an analysis of his doctrine, and an inquiry into the historical sources of his doctrine on the Word. For this the author had to examine the relation in which Clement stood in philosophy and theology towards classical antiquity, Alexandrine Judaeism, the Apostolic Fathers, and the first Christian apologists. The subject proper of the essay was divided into two parts: the first treated of the relations of the Word with God; the second considered the Word as the Revealer. The work was well received by the faculty of theology, and its author was declared the successful candidate, 31st of October, 1854. By the advice of Winer and others, and by the kindness of Tischendorf, it was published in March, 1855. Wachsmuth, dean of the faculty of philosophy, advised M. Laemmer to stand his examination for the doctorship in philosophy, and backed his advice by the offer of a burse to enable him to meet the expenses. The young student obtained this degree after having presented a dissertation on the religious philosophy of Clement of Alexandria, and having passed a successful examination.

We have seen that M. Laemmer qualifies this episode in his studies as the first step he made towards Catholicity. It may be asked, what was the special fruit derived by him from these patristic studies? The answer is, that it enabled him to shake off the influence of the Tübingen theories, which had hitherto held sway over his mind. The whole work of that school simply amounts to an attempt to submit to the all-powerful action of critical caprice the canon of Scripture and the most remarkable works of Christian antiquity, and to affirm all their own theories as indisputable facts, while they treat as fables the most authentic facts of history. Now, the more clearly it is proved that the historical origin of Christianity is able to resist the crucial tests to which it has been submitted, the more shadowy and insubsistent do these capricious theories become. Hence, the study undertaken by M. Laemmer did in reality, by occupying him with the objective side of patristic teaching, most powerfully contribute to destroy in his mind the authority of Baur, Hilgenfeld, and the others of the Tübingen school.

Soon after the publication of his work, M. Laemmer was invited to the University of Berlin by his kind friend Lehnerdt, who had never lost sight of his promising pupil, and now wished him to prepare himself for a professor's chair by a solid course of theologico-historical studies. On arriving at Berlin the youthful doctor of philosophy was appointed to hold for two years the Evangelical Centenary Burse, founded by the city of Berlin in commemoration of the three hundredth anniversary of the Reformation. After his conversion many persons demanded that he should make restitution to the burse fund, which, according to them, he had employed against the intentions of the founders.

"But (asks Mr. Laemmer), for what reasons was I chosen in preference to the other candidates? I contented myself with presenting my memoir on the Alexandrine Clement's doctrine on the Word; the examiners of the Leipsic faculty of philosophy testified that I had successfully passed the examination: the faculty of theology of the same city said, amongst other flattering things, that I had applied myself to the studies of theology with equal ardour and success. As to the two memoirs presented for the concursus of 1853 and 1854, it was said that in them I had given proof of solid classical studies, of a remarkable knowledge of theology, of sound judgment, and penetrating mind, and that my work on the Word showed great aptitude for historical investigations. These were beyond doubt the reasons why the committee preferred me to the other candidates; and the sole condition imposed upon me—namely, that of becoming a licentiate, I complied with within the appointed time. Why then all this outcry? Why these demands for restitution, with which even a Hengstenberg has been associated? Herein consists the head and front of my offending, that the use of private judgment, or, to speak accurately, the secret inspirations of God's grace, led me to see the truth and to betake myself to the bosom of the true Church. If, instead, I had become an unbeliever, the slightest murmur of complaint would not have been heard; but when there is question of Catholicism, pietism the most honeyed often makes common cause with the grossest infidelity: the great point then is to form a compact body against the mighty foe" (p. 105, 106).

We cannot linger over the account given by M. Laemmer of the different tendencies he found in the theological faculty of Berlin, nor on the present state or future prospects of the Union. 15 But the name of Hengstenberg 16 is so well known to most Catholics that the description given of him by one who has known him so well, is sure to excite interest.

"The reputation which Hengstenberg had acquired by his numerous works brought him frequently before my mind. The impression he made on me when I saw him at Berlin, did not modify the notion I had long formed of him. It is well known that he passed through many phases of doctrine before he reached the point at which, for some years, he has remained stationary. He left the University full of the pietism of the day, and was immediately appointed professor at Berlin, where, as professor and author, he bent all his energies against the rationalistic criticism, the application of which to the Holy Scriptures had produced such disastrous consequences. It must be admitted that, in this respect, he has brought back to better ways a certain number of his contemporaries; that he has arrested the progress of extravagant criticism; that in his works on the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Messianic Prophecies, he has won for sound views the consideration long refused them. But it was impossible that his ablest scholars should not see the weak side of his hermeneutical and theological principles; hence, many of them have abandoned his method for one altogether different. His Commentary on the Apocalypse is assuredly his most characteristic work. To comprehend his stand-point in this work, we must remember that he composed it in 1848 and 1849. In it he frequently and unreservedly favours the chiliastic tendencies of Irving.... He has endeavoured to remove some of the Protestant prejudices against the Catholic Church, such as Luther's blasphemy of the Roman Antichrist. He admits (as Luther did, when under the influence of the Christian idea) that Catholicism is in possession of the word of God, the true sacraments, and the power of the keys. He is clearer and more straightforward than his predecessor Bengel in the Gnomon Novi Testamenti. But he halts in his march, laying himself open to the charge of Catholic tendencies, and could but be silent when reproached by Schenkel, who told him that Romanism was more honourable than the vacillating and intermediate position he had assumed. He resembles Stehl, Kliefoth, and others, who would wish to place in the same setting the jewels of Catholicism and those of Wittemberg; who rank together the theory nothing but the Bible, and the principle of authority; who are but half acquainted with Luther, and almost ignorant of Rome; who, in spite of their pretended adhesion to principle, would be disposed to all kinds of compromises; who lack the courage and the humility requisite to comprehend that the fragments of truth possessed by Luther have been borrowed from the immense and indivisible treasure of the Church. The Church has nothing to hope from men of this class; they lack a thorough and absolute thirst for truth; they are self-complacent; they imagine themselves to have received from heaven an extraordinary mission like the prophets; they assume the right to dictate to the infallible authority of the Church; to satisfy them, we must become syncretists, and ask them in what is it their pleasure that the Catholic Church should modify in its doctrines, its ceremonies, and its discipline; men of fine phrases, and not of action; more of show than of reality" (p. 117).

During his residence at Berlin, M. Laemmer entered upon a careful preparation for the degree of doctor of divinity. He devoted himself more and more to the study of the Fathers; the works of St. Hilary of Poitiers on the Trinity left him an humble and firm believer in that august mystery. In 1856 his mind received a fresh and more decided impulse in the direction of the Church. In that year the Berlin faculty of theology gave as the subject of the concursus, Give an exposition (from the documents) of the Roman Catholic doctrine, contained in the memorial presented to Charles V. at the Diet of Augsburg, in as far as it appears to throw light on the true Evangelical doctrine set forth in the Augsburg Confession. This subject was chosen for the concursus by Lehnerdt, who felt that Catholic theology, from the beginning of the Reformation to the Council of Trent, was almost entirely unknown. M. Laemmer having resolved to become one of the competitors, at once set about the necessary study. He first examined the Protestant confessional books, in order to fix the points at issue between them and their adversaries. If he were to trust these authorities, nothing could be clearer than the stupid ignorance of the Catholics, and the wisdom of the Protestants. But the declamation with which this was urged appeared to him to be the language of passion. He determined to learn from their own writings the character of the Catholic theologians so soundly abused by their opponents. He first examined the Official refutation of the Augsburg Confession, the joint work of the flower of the Catholic theologians, Eck, Faber, Wimpina, etc.; next he came to the various works published by them, before and after 1530, against the various successive developements of Protestantism; then came the German theology of Berthold Chiemsie; the Confession of Cardinal Hosius; Erasmus; Tetzel; Henry VIII.; Fisher, Bishop of Rochester; Ambrosius Catharinus; the Sorbonne; Sadoletus; Contarini; the minutes of the conferences held at that epoch in Germany and Switzerland; the Pontifical instructions in Rainaldi and Leplat, and last, the acts of the Imperial Diet, as far as they touched on religious and ecclesiastical questions. In all, he had to study seventy Catholic works of the period.

"God knows", he tells us, "how I was moved as I read them, and how violent were the struggles in which I was engaged. I endeavoured to resist the force of the arguments before me, but I could not. I would not permit myself to call in question that great axiom of Protestants, that the Reformation was right and necessary. The humility required to correspond with the motions of grace was wanting to me; scientific pride still insisted on its pretended rights. I had only arrived so far as to understand that the opinions pronounced by the reformers on their adversaries were frequently partial, erroneous, and malevolent; that the intellectual power of these latter was not so contemptible as it had been represented; and finally, that their principles had been frequently travestied at the pleasure of the fathers of Protestantism" (p. 139).

Having completed his study of these sources, he arranged his materials in the following order: The first chapter treated of the Church, the Primacy, the Scripture, Tradition, the Councils; the second, of the state of innocence, of the fall, of original sin and its consequences; the third, of free-will and grace; the fourth, of justification, of the fulfilment of the law, and of the evangelical counsels; then came the sacraments in genere et in specie; finally, the saints and the worship due to them. The title of his manuscript was De Theologia Romano-Catholica quae Reformatorum aetate viguit, ante-Tridentina. The work was successful, and received high praise from the faculty of theology. It was said, however, that the author was too impartial—nimis justus—towards Catholicism. This qualification was added at the request of Hengstenberg, who did not like too well the favourable notice given of Catholic writers. And yet notwithstanding all this, Dr. Laemmer was still far from being a Catholic. He himself tells us that at most he had arrived at the position held by Leo. On the 3rd of August, 1856, he received the prize, and had the satisfaction of learning at the same time that his memoir was accepted as the dissertation required for the license. In a few days he passed the rigorosum, and in the same month made his public disputation, taking for the theme of his introductory discourse St. Bernard's work, De consideratione. He received his license, and immediately left Berlin for the country to recruit his shattered health. In the country he preached frequently, wrote an analysis of G. Voigt's Pius II. and his age, and a dissertation on the doctrine of justification, held by the Catholic theologian, Contarini, in which he now admits he was mistaken as to his estimate of the sentiments of that divine. Returning to Berlin with renewed health, he was appointed to give religious instruction, and to teach Hebrew in the Frederic Gymnasium. It must have been a difficult task for one perplexed in mind as M. Laemmer was, to undertake the religious instruction of a body of young men at the very doors of the University of Berlin. Among his youthful hearers he found open infidelity, rationalism, the doctrines of Schleiermacher, Pietism, confessionalism, in one word, each class was a miniature copy of the Protestant world around. But he did not swerve from the path of duty. He boldly set before them, as the central truth of religion, the Man-God dying on the cross for the world. In vain did his hearers bring forward the pretended results of modern criticism, and natural explanations of supernatural facts; M. Laemmer insisted with energy upon the credibility and the inspiration of S. Scriptures, and on the miracles and prophecies narrated in them. He also made it his duty to lead his charge to love and practise prayer. In spite of their resistance he obliged even the higher classes to recite the Decalogue and the Apostles' Creed; and he was consoled by seeing his firmness rewarded by the happiest results. At Easter, 1857, he passed his examination for the doctor's degree, having chosen for the subject of his theme Pope Nicholas I. and the Court of Byzantium. Again he was successful: Lehnerdt, to whom he had dedicated his thesis, observed to him with great gentleness that he was not far from Hurter's idea of the Papacy. And in truth this last labour had brought him much nearer to the Church by reason of the brilliant light it cast on the character and office of the Papacy in Christianity. In 1857 he found time to publish a new edition of St. Anselm's Cur Deus homo, and to write a paper on the conversion of Herman of Kappenburg. In June 1858 he revised for the press his treatise on the ante-Tridentine theology. In preparing the revision he made a study of modern Catholic works on history, dogma, moral and canon law. He became familiar with the Roman Breviary, to which his attention had been called by the attempt made by a Protestant minister to form a Lutheran Breviary. He also read and admired Cardinal Wiseman's Fabiola.

"I now understood the Memorare and the Sub tuum; I began to recite the Ave Maria, to salute together with the angel the Mother of my God, to seek her compassion, that she might obtain for me grace to be completely enlightened, and to enter into the Saviour's one fold. The sting of doubt tormented me unceasingly; on my knees, before my crucifix in my lonely chamber, I experienced the most painful struggles. As I had ever preserved such fragments of Christian truth as the Reformers had spared, and as for many long years I had occupied myself with the solution of the leading questions in philosophy and theology, it appeared to me very hard to submit my reason to the yoke of faith. But prayer removed all these obstacles, and when soon after I came to knock at the door of the Church, I found it easy to assent to all the truths that were proposed to my belief" (p. 163).

With many other Protestants, he assisted at the exercises of a mission given at Berlin by the Jesuit Fathers, and reaped therefrom much benefit. In July, 1858, he received permission from the minister of worship to explore the libraries of Germany and northern Italy, to collect such manuscripts of Eusebius as might be found, with a view to a new revision of the text of that historian. He visited Leipsic, Dresden, Vienna, Venice, Padua, Milan, and Munich. At Dresden, Wolfgang de Goethe took him to be a Catholic priest. At Venice he met with F. Ignazio Mozzoni, of the order of St. John of God, author of a remarkable history of the Church, and was edified by the piety and the literary activity of the Mechitarists. The intercourse he had with Catholic ecclesiastics, and the sight of Catholic ceremonies and rites, were of signal service to him by removing unfavourable impressions. Among other details he tells us:

"I shall never forget a certain Irish Dominican, the very type of a perfect religious, who aroused in me profound emotions by the account he gave me of the sad condition of his fellow-countrymen, crushed by English rule" (p. 191).

His scientific mission was finished at Munich, whither he returned from his long journey still a Protestant. But the end was at hand, and we must allow him to describe it in his own words:

"After leaving Munich, I continued for some weeks to suffer great anguish of mind. At length the decisive hour came, and the sun of grace had completed the work of my enlightenment. I decided to become a Catholic on the 14th of October, 1858, the feast of St. Theresa, whose powerful intercession strengthened my weakness. I communicated my resolutions to the minister of worship and to the faculty of theology of Berlin, and I requested my bishop—the Bishop of Ermland—to receive me into the bosom of the Roman Catholic Church, in which, after long and painful struggles, I had at length recognized the depositary of the truth, and the legitimate spouse of the Son of God: thus would my heart be at peace. 'Glory and praise', said my letter, 'to our Lord Jesus Christ, who has enabled me to surmount all obstacles, who has graciously heard my prayers, who has had pity on me, who has broken my chains, who has scattered the darkness that hung over me, who has shown me the path to the fold. Since conscientious investigations have proved to me that the so-called Reformation of the sixteenth century has but disfigured the type of the true Church of Jesus Christ, and that its principles, far from being salutary, are essentially destructive and the necessary cause of the effects which history has registered during three centuries—that the Protestant confessions and their apologists, instead of attacking the Church's genuine teaching, do but distort it to insure an easy victory; since I am convinced that the Reformers had neither the duty nor the right to attempt a reform apart from and against the head of the Church and the episcopate; that the religious divisions of our age are caused by the refusal to submit to the Church and return to the centre whence we departed in the sixteenth century; since the historical development of the Church has been proved to me unbroken down to the present day; since I have learned to justify and love her doctrine, her morality, and her worship; from the day on which the grace of God has permitted me to be convinced of these truths, my return to the Catholic Church has become a matter of necessity, and it is only by a public confession of my faith that I can hope to regain tranquillity of conscience, that peace of the heart which the world cannot give, nor yet, in spite of all its fraud and anger, can ever take away'".

It is needless to add that the Bishop of Ermland acceded to this touching request. On St. Catherine's Day, during the jubilee of 1858, Dr. Laemmer made his profession of Catholic faith, and received the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist. Towards the end of the same year he was admitted to the diocesan seminary of Ermland, where he received confirmation, tonsure, and holy orders. Soon after his ordination he was sent to Rome. Several valuable works on subjects of ecclesiastical history have since appeared from him, and much is still expected at his hands. 17 In the bosom of the Catholic Church, his doubts dispelled, his heart at peace, well indeed may he love to repeat with joy and gratitude—Misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabo!—(Ps. xxxii., 21).

TWO ILLUSTRIOUS GRAVES.

We are happy to be the first to announce to the Irish public the discovery of the exact spot wherein the remains of our great Irish chieftain, Hugh O'Neill, repose, side by side with those of Archbishop Matthews.

This privilege we owe to the great kindness of Rev. Dr. Moran, the distinguished Vice-Rector of the Irish College of St. Agatha, Rome, who has permitted us to anticipate the publication of the second part of the first volume of his History of the Catholic Archbishops of Dublin since the Reformation, in which the event is described. Of the volume itself we shall soon have occasion to speak at some length. For the present it is enough to say, that like each of Dr. Moran's other works, it has the great merit of being a work for the times. His Life of Archbishop Plunkett, and his History of the Irish Persecutions, were valuable, no doubt, for the light they cast on an important epoch, and for the proof they afforded of our forefathers' constancy in the faith. Far more valuable, however, than these are Dr. Moran's Essays on the Origin, Doctrines, and Antiquities of the Irish Church, in which, with an extraordinary lucidity of reasoning and a singular amount of erudition, he answers all the arguments and refutes all the theories of modern Protestant writers and lecturers, who have undertaken the hopeless task of proving that the religion of the early church of our fathers was identical with that which had its origin in the corruption and cruelty of Henry VIII. and his daughter Elizabeth, and which, as far as it has extended, was introduced into Ireland by fire and sword and the most cruel penal laws. Any one who reads Dr. Moran's essays will admit that not only Whiteside and Napier, who have ventured to lecture on the ancient doctrines of the Irish Church, with which they were altogether unacquainted, but also some learned antiquarians who have treated of the same subject, were quite astray in their views, and had no solid arguments on which to ground their opinions.

Our first extract is taken from the life of the venerable Archbishop, Dr. Matthews, who governed the see of Dublin in a most critical and disastrous period, from the 2nd May, 1611, to the 1st of September, 1623, when he died an exile in Rome. This extract is found at page 262, and gives an account of the persecutions to which Catholics were subjected in the reign of James I., who was supposed to be less hostile than his predecessor Elizabeth:

"The greater part of the treatise of Dr. Roothe, entitled Analecta, is taken up with details of the sufferings of our Church at this sad period. The chief facts, however, which he commemorates are: (1) that the fines levied in the county Cavan, in 1615, for the mere crime of not assisting at Protestant service, amounted to more than eight thousand pounds; (2) that when some of the poor Catholics of the county Meath, who were unwilling to pay this tax, fled from the cruel collectors of it into the caverns and mountain recesses, furious bloodhounds were often let loose in pursuit of them, followed by the sheriff and his posse of soldiers, equally furious and unrelenting; (3) that the Protestant authorities had constant recourse to ecclesiastical censures, in consequence of which, great numbers of Catholic merchants and artificers were thrown into prison, and reduced to extreme poverty and distress; (4) that those who happened to die whilst under the ban of these Protestant censures, were denied Christian burial, and thrown into graves dug in the highways, where, to increase the ignominy, stakes were driven through their bodies. 18

"More interesting to the reader than all these narratives, will probably be the sketch of the sufferings of Ireland from the pen of the archbishop himself,—a sketch drawn up with special care by Dr. Matthews, in 1623, and presented by him to the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda. 19 He thus writes:—

"'Although from the very commencement of the schism we have been constantly in the battle-field, and, with the exception of the momentary repose enjoyed during the reign of Catholic Mary, have been unceasingly exposed to the attacks of our persecutors, yet so severe are their late assaults, that, in comparison, all their preceding efforts sink into insignificance. Of this persecution I myself have been a witness and a sharer, and I shall briefly commemorate a few of its chief heads.

"'Some years ago the heretics strained every nerve to introduce into Ireland those laws which the English parliament enacted against the Catholics of England, and to resuscitate the penal code which had been surreptitiously passed at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign. A parliament was summoned to attain these ends. The government again sought by every art and violence to secure the election of English or Scotch heretical soldiers. Lest our Catholics might prevail by their numbers, new English and Scotch colonies were planted, and endowed with the privilege of representation. Moreover, a number of titles were conferred on various heretics, whilst the remonstrances of the Catholics were unheeded. Nevertheless, no counsel can prevail against the Lord. All the heretical efforts were fruitless; and so strenuously did the Catholics defend their sacred cause, that their adversaries did not dare even to propose the penal statutes. The heretics had then recourse to royal prerogative, that thus, without any form of law or justice, they might riot against the Catholics; and so violent is the storm of persecution which they have thus excited, that it almost baffles description.

"'1. All Catholics are removed from the administration of affairs, and even the smallest offices are given to heretics and schismatics, who may with impunity persecute the Catholics according to their fancies.

"'2. No Catholic can hold property throughout the entire kingdom; everything is seized on by heretical colonists, and the ejected Catholic proprietors cannot even live as servants on those lands of which they are the masters by hereditary right. For the heretics have learned by experience that there is no people in the world so attached to the faith of their fathers as are the Irish, in defence of which they often had recourse to arms, and risked their fortunes and lives. Seeing, therefore, that penal laws could not suffice to destroy their devotion to the Catholic religion, they had recourse to new arts, and by a disastrous counsel commenced to fill the country with English and Scotch colonies; whilst at the present time, in consequence of the treaties entered into with the continental states, the Irish can hope for no assistance from other powers. Thus, then, the natives, though unaccused of any crime, are, without colour of justice, without any feeling of humanity, without any fear of Him who will punish the oppressors, expelled from the homes of their fathers and from their hereditary estates. Sometimes they are driven to other parts of the kingdom, where small portions of land are assigned to them for their maintenance; sometimes they are compelled to fly from the island, and seek support by entering the armies of the Continent. Heretics being thus introduced into the Catholic lands, a great part of the kingdom is polluted with their sacrilegious impieties; and unless God may avert the dire calamity, the ancient faith will be banished from the whole island. As this evil is propagated by brute force, and as our people have neither skill nor power to cope with our enemies, we must wholly rely for its remedy on the mercy of God.

"'3. Ministers and preachers were sought out everywhere in Scotland and England, and sent hither to pervert our Catholics.

"'4. All benefices and other ecclesiastical property were, from the beginning, seized on by the heretics. In each diocese there is a pseudo-bishop, and in each parish a pseudo-minister.

"'5. The Catholics are compelled to repair, for heretical worship, the churches and chapels which these iconoclasts themselves had destroyed.

"'6. The pseudo-clergy not only seize on all the revenues, but exact payment for the sacraments of baptism and marriage, even when they are administered by the Catholic priests; the sum thus exacted sometimes amounts to four guineas or more, according to the will of the Protestant ministers, who make no account of the poverty and misery of the people. In addition to these exactions, a salary was lately assigned to a certain heretic, to be levied on the births, marriages, and deaths of the Catholics.

"'7. Four times in the year questors are appointed to explore the Catholics throughout the whole kingdom, and impose fines on all who absent themselves from the heretical sermons and communion. As this fine is not defined by law, the judges and questors display great earnestness and avarice in exacting it, through hatred of our holy religion.

"'8. On each Sunday, each Catholic father of a family is obliged to pay a pecuniary fine for himself and for each Catholic member of his family. This fine is exacted without mercy even from the poorest labourers.

"'9. The pseudo-bishops have introduced a new system of excommunicating, forsooth, the Catholics; from which excommunication the Catholic cannot be freed, except by recognizing the spiritual authority of these bishops, and thus sacrificing their own faith. Those thus excommunicated are liable to arrest; and should they die, are interred in unconsecrated ground.

"'10. Those who assist at Mass, incur a penalty of one hundred marks.

"'11. All our gentry and nobility are obliged to send their heirs to be educated and perverted in England.

"'12. None of the nobility are now allowed to succeed to their paternal inheritance, without first taking the oath of royal supremacy: otherwise they and their posterity are deprived of their revenues, and thus the dreadful alternative is presented to them of perversion or poverty.

"'13. It is interdicted to the Catholics to teach school either in public or in private; on the other hand, heretical masters are hired in every diocese, and paid from the revenue of some benefices, to pervert our youth and imbue them with heresy. In fact, the heretics have obstructed every avenue by which our youth could receive instruction in this kingdom; and by their severe penalties and rigorous searches, they seek to render it impossible for any Catholic teacher to remain in the country. Moreover, having created a university in the city of Dublin, the seat of the viceroy and the capital of the whole kingdom, they employ every artifice to attract our children to its schools. Indeed, they could not possibly devise any scheme more iniquitous than that of thus corrupting our youth.

"'14. The Catholic cities are deprived of their ancient liberties, privileges, and rights, and are reduced to the rank of towns, unless they elect heretics as their mayors and aldermen, or, at least, select such persons as the heretics approve of, as lately happened to the city of Waterford, which holds the second place in the kingdom for its strength and opulence'".

The second extract is the last appendix to the volume. It gives us the epitaphs of Hugh O'Neill and Dr. Matthews, which are now published for the first time.

Epitaph of the Most Rev. Eugene Matthews, Archbishop of Dublin.

"This volume was already in type, when we were fortunate enough to meet with the original epitaph which marked the last resting place of the illustrious Archbishop Matthews.

"Near the summit of the Janiculum, in the city of Rome, stands the well known church of San Pietro-in-Montorio. It contains many treasures of art, and its paintings retail the names of Raffaelle, Michael Angelo, Pinturicchio, Vasari, and other great masters. More dear to the Christian pilgrim is the adjoining shrine, which guards the clay in which was set the cross of the Prince of the Apostles.

"It was in this church that the last princes of Tyrone and Tyrconnel were interred. In the second row of tombs with which the pavement of the church is lined, the Irish traveller will find without difficulty the epitaph of Hugh baron of Dungannon, who died in September, 1609, and of the two O'Donnells, who died in the autumn of 1608. 20 It is known that Hugh O'Neil, earl of Tyrone, was also interred here; but hitherto his tomb has been sought for in vain. The archives of the adjoining monastery, however, have at length come to our aid. The last great Irish chieftain expired in the Palazzo Salviati, on the 20th of July, 1616, and the register of San Pietro-in-Montorio marks the 24th of July, 1616, as the day on which his remains were, with princely pomp, laid within its vaults. This same register further tells us that his epitaph, now wholly obliterated, held the first place in the third row of tombs which mark the pavement of the church, and that it consisted of the simple record:

D. O. M.
HIC QUIESCUNT OSSA
HUGONIS PRINCIPIS O'NEILL.

"It was alongside the tomb of Hugh O'Neil that Eugene Matthews, archbishop of Dublin, reposed in death. His epitaph, says the register of the church, holds the second place in the third row of tombs. The slab which corresponds with this indication now only retains some faint traces of letters here and there, it being impossible to decipher even one word of its original inscription. Here again the church register comes to our aid; it tells us that the following was the inscription on Dr. Matthews' tomb:

D. O. M.
EUGENIO MATTHEI, ARCHIEPISCOPO DUBLINENSI,
DOCTRINÆ CLARITATE NATALIUM SPLENDORE,
FIDE IN DEUM PIETATE IN PATRIAM SINGULARI
QUI POSTQUAM SOLLICITI PASTORIS,
DIUTURNO AC DIFFICILI TEMPORE IN HIBERNIA,
NUMEROS OMNES ADIMPLESSET,
SUB GREGORIO XV., ROMAM VENIT,
UBI AB OPTIMO PONTIFICE BENIGNE HABITUS,
DUM PATRIÆ SUÆ NEGOTIA PROMOVERET,
EXTREMUM DIEM CLAUSIT KAL. SEPT. 1623.

"Thus, as Dr. Matthews was closely allied by blood with the families of Tyrone and Tyrconnel; as he in youth shared with them the perils of the Catholic camp; as, when bishop of Clogher, he enjoyed with them the hospitality of the great pontiff, Paul V., in the Salviati Palace, Rome; so was he destined to be united with them in death, and to repose with them beneath the shadow of St. Peter's dome, amidst the sanctuaries and shrines of the Eternal City. We cannot better conclude than with the words of the Four Masters, when registering the death of Hugh O'Neil: 'Although he died far distant from Armagh, the burial place of his ancestors, it was a manifestation that God was pleased with his life; for the place in which God granted him to be buried was Rome, the capital of the Christians'".

LITURGICAL QUESTIONS.

In the last number of the Record we laid down some rules for the convenience and guidance of the clergy in determining what mass is to be said on the occasion of marriage. We did not, however, point out the cases in which the nuptial benediction cannot be given, and when the mass pro sponso et sponsa cannot be said. The Roman Ritual has the following words:—"Caveat etiam parochus ne quando conjuges in primis nuptiis benedictionem acceperint, eos in secundis benedicat, sive mulier sive etiam vir ad secundas transeat. Sed ubi ea viget consuetudo ut si mulier nemini unquam nupserit, etiamsi vir aliam uxorem habuerit, nuptiae benedicantur, ea servanda est. Sed viduae nuptias non benedicat, etiamsi ejus vir nunquam uxorem duxerit". It is clear from these words that the nuptial benediction is not to be given, nor is the mass pro sponso et sponsa, to be said, in case a widow is to be married.

This will appear still more evident from two decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites bearing on this subject:—

No. 4150.—Quaer. 4º "Si mulier esset vidua debetne omitti missa pro sponso et sponsa et omittendae sunt benedictiones infra eam descriptae post orationem Dominicam et Ite missa est?"

Ad. 4.—"Si mulier est vidua non solum debet omitti benedictio nuptiarum, sed etiam, missa propria pro sponso et sponsa. Die 3 Martii, 1761".

And again on the 31st of August, 1839, the following questions were answered:—

1. Quando nuptiae celebrantur tempore Adventus vel Quadragesimae debetne fieri commemoratio missae pro sponso et sponsa per Collectam Secretam, et Post communionem?

2. Licetne recitare supra sponsos preces seu orationes in missali positas post orationem Dominicam et Ite missa est?

3. Quando praedictae orationes non sunt recitatae in missa nuptiarum, debentne recitari extra missam elapso tempore prohibito?

Quae singula dubia sedulo de more perpendentes Eminentissimi et Reverendissimi patres sacris tuendis Ritibus praepositi in ordinario Coetu ad Quirinale subsignata die coadunati, auditaque fideli relatione ab infrascripto secretario facta respondendum censuerunt: serventur Rubricae Missalis ac generalia memorata Decreta quibus edicitur ut quoniam temporibus ab Ecclesia vetitis, locum haberi nequit solemnis benedictio nuptiarum, ita pariter inhibetur commemoratio pro sponso et sponsa in Missa occurrente neque orationes resumendae extra missam tempore prohibito jam elapso.

Atque ita rescripserunt, declararunt ac servandum omnino mandarunt. Die 31 Augusti, 1839.

We shall now proceed to answer other questions which were some time since sent to us by a much respected and zealous clergyman in connexion with the administration of marriage.

1. In what part of the church are the spouses to take their places? are they to stand or kneel during the ceremony?

2. Is the surname to be repeated in the ceremony?

3. Is the ring to be put from finger to finger or on the ring finger at once, as laid down in Roman Ritual?

4. How much of the Ritus Pontificalis of marriage ought a priest to adopt? for instance can he use a cope?

5. Is a lighted candle, and how many, to be used at the marriage ceremony, or in blessing holy water, etc.?

In answer to the first question, we beg to say that the Roman Ritual simply says: "Matrimonium in Ecclesia maxima celebrari decet". It was quite unnecessary to say more, inasmuch as the Ritual lays down that the spouses are to assist at mass and to approach Holy Communion. When these particulars are observed, the spouses should, of course, occupy a place near the altar, and even in case there should be no mass, it appears to us quite proper that they should contract marriage at the altar, while we cannot point out the precise place, as the Rubrics of the Ritual do not enter into further details. With regard to the kneeling, the Ritual says nothing: we think, however, that the practice of allowing them to stand while expressing their mutual consent, and kneeling down at the words Ego conjungo vos, etc., may safely be followed. This practice is indicated in some Rituals: "Ac primo sponsum interreget stantem ad dextram mulieris", and in the Roman Pontifical, "Muliere ad sinistram viri stante". The Roman Ritual does not mention these details.

It is not at all necessary to repeat the surname in the ceremony. Baruffaldi, in his "Commentaria ad Rituale Romanum", has the following words: "Post nomen non utique est necessarium addere cognomen gentilitium quia per verba illa hic praesentem satis indicatur quinam sit illa de quo agitur. Nihilominus ad abundantiam nonnulli solent addere quoque cognomen prosapiae et nomina parentum illorum qui contrahunt ad evitandum omnem errorem circa personam". Baruffaldi, de Matrimonio, tit. xlii. The Roman Ritual certainly appears to state that the ring is to be placed on the ring finger at once, and so does the Pontifical; however, it is to be remembered that other Rituals do not contradict this, but they would appear rather to explain the manner of observing what is prescribed in the Roman Ritual by moving it from finger to finger, and reciting the words at the same time as pointed out in the Ritual. Our respected correspondent, when proposing these questions for the very laudable purpose of securing uniformity of practice in so important a matter, must recollect the words of the Roman Ritual: "Caeterum si quae provinciae aliis, ultra praedictas, laudabilibus consuetudinibus et caeremoniis in celebrando matrimonii sacramento utantur, eas sancta Tridentina synodus optat retineri". On which words Baruffaldi, commenting, says: "Cum Ecclesia Catholica delere introductas et per longa saecula approbatas caeremonias, impossibile iudicaverit, illas quodammodo retineri laudavit, optavitque dummodo sint vere laudabiles et merae consuetudines, non autem ritus sacramentales sacramentum deformantes". Hence, we should not be surprised if in different countries and even in different districts a diversity of practice exist in regard to details, "quae substantiam sacramenti non laedunt nec pietatem offendunt". At the same time, however, it is but right that we should observe the rubrics of the Ritual, as, the more accurate we are in doing so, the greater will be the uniformity of practice, which is most desirable.

The principles which we have laid down will enable us to answer question 4. We should not consider the pastor deserving of censure for using a cope on a very solemn occasion, though undoubtedly there is no mention made of it in the Ritual, whereas it is prescribed in the Pontifical for a Bishop; and, as a direct answer, we should be disposed to state that a priest may adopt as much of the Ritus Pontificalis as is consistent with the due observance of the Ritual. The priest ought to be guided by the Ritual, while he leaves to the bishop the observance of the Ritus Pontificalis as laid down in the Roman Pontifical.

We now proceed to answer the fifth and last question. The Rubrics require lighted candles in the blessing of the ashes, palms, and candles; but in the blessings referred to in the proposed question, the use of candles is not prescribed, though we think it would be very becoming to have lighted candles at a marriage even when there is no mass.

Nothing, however, is better calculated to edify and to impress the faithful with a sense of the dignity and character of the great sacrament, as it is called by St. Paul, in Christ and in the Church, than the holy sacrifice of the Mass; and hence the Holy Catholic Church, anxious to invest it with all possible solemnity, exhorts the married couple to prepare for its reception by confession and communion, and has appointed a special mass for the purpose; and accordingly we find that here in Ireland, even in the times of persecution, the nuptial benediction and mass were prescribed by Dr. Matthews, Archbishop of Dublin, and his suffragans, in a provincial synod at Kilkenny, in the year 1614. "Si quando contigerit, parochum aliquos matrimonialiter conjungere, non habitâ tunc opportunitate impertiendi illis nuptialem benedictionem, quae infra missarum solemnia dari solet, moneat verbis gravibus contrahentes, ne ante hujusmodi a se ipso, et non alio sacerdote, acceptam benedictionem, in eadem domo cohabitent, et multo minús, matrimonium consummare praesumant. Similiter sponsos de futuro moneat, ut a nimia familiarite caveant, et ne se ullatenus carnaliter cognoscant, donec matrimonium de praesenti contraxerint, et benedictionem nuptialem (prout dictum est) obtinuerint"—(Vide Dr. Moran's History of the Archbishops of Dublin, vol. i. p. 453, which contains all the statutes of that synod). With the same view we thought it well to publish some of the decrees having reference to the nuptial mass, by which it is easily seen how the dignity of this sacrament has been upheld by the Church, while the system introduced by governments in other countries would have the effect of degrading it to the level of a mere civil contract, and depriving it of the blessing and sanction of heaven. If we shall have succeeded in an humble way in showing the dignity of the marriage contract by the wise rules and discipline established by the Catholic Church, we will have performed a work agreeable, we are sure, to the readers of the Record, and attained at least one of the objects aimed at by its conductors.

CORRESPONDENCE.

[The Editors are not responsible for the statements made by correspondents.]

To the Editors of the Record.

Reverend Gentlemen,

Since you have been kind enough to set aside a portion of the Record for the insertion of correspondence upon theological and liturgical subjects, I trust that you will allow me to offer a few remarks upon a letter which has appeared in the number 21 for the present month, regarding the method of applying for dispensations in gradu inaequali consanguinitatis. Your correspondent justly considers that the question is of great importance, and hence it may be well to call attention to some inaccuracies which, if uncorrected, would neutralize the good effects of his "hint to fellow-labourers in the vineyard".

1. The question of which Gury treats at page 594, is the necessity of mentioning the gradus propior, and not the gradus remotior, as stated in your correspondent's letter.

2. According to the opinion now almost universally received, this necessity does not exist—so far as the validity of the dispensation is concerned—except when the gradus propior is the gradus primus, which should be always mentioned, whether it concurs with the second, third, or fourth; and your correspondent is quite correct in stating that a misapprehension of the meaning of a constitution of Benedict XIV. has led St. Liguori to adopt an opinion completely at variance with this. But it is manifest that the Saint's mistake has not been "inserted in the very latest editions of the works on moral theology most in use at present—such as those of Gury and Scavini"; for, while St. Liguori extends the necessity to all those cases in which the first or second degree concurs with another more remote (Theol. Mor., lib., n. 1136), Gury falls into the opposite extreme by maintaining that in consanguinitate inaequali, even the first degree need not be mentioned, except when it concurs with the second (Gury, Theol. Moralis, 13th ed., p. 594, n. 867, not 876.)

3. Scavini certainly copied in the earliest editions of his work the opinion of St. Liguori; but the mistake has been long since corrected. In the Paris Edition of 1855, he says: "Declaravit Benedictus XIV., Brevi Etsi, conjugium ... illicitum esse sed non invalidum modo propinquitas non sit primi gradus consanguinitatis vel affinitatis, scilicet mixti cum caeteris usque ad quartum gradum"—t. 4, p. 503. I have examined several editions which were published since the one from which I have quoted, and in all these the same view is laid down.

4. Your correspondent states that the opinion of Gury was adopted by Scavini. I think this statement is hardly correct. Most certainly it is not correct with reference to any of the editions of Scavini's works which are commonly used in Ireland.

5. In a late edition of Gury's work, which, I suppose, has not yet fallen under the notice of your correspondent, the error in n. 867 is corrected by the following note: "Invalidatur in genere, dispensatio si reticetur primus gradus ... pro foro interno, expressio propioris gradus non requiritur nisi sit primus". Editio tertia Germanica n. 867, p. 465.

6. Cardinal Gousset undoubtedly followed the view of St. Liguori; but the reference to his work should be t. 2, n. 865, not n. 1136.

7. In conclusion, I may remark that the theory suggested by your correspondent as a possible explanation of St. Liguori's mistake, does not appear to be admissible. The constitution Etsi Matr. had reference indeed to a case in which two impediments existed; and the Pope declared that the marriage was invalid, because no mention had been made of the double impediment in the petition for the dispensation. He explained, however, at some length that the invalidity was caused by this defect alone, and that no difficulty would have arisen in case there had been but one impediment—relationship in the third and fourth degrees, although the dispensation had been granted for the fourth without any mention of the third.

Amongst other reasons for this decision, he speaks of the common consent of theologians, who agree that in the case of a relationship in the third and fourth degrees, it is not necessary to mention the gradus propinquior when seeking the dispensation.

There can be no doubt that it was this passage which induced St. Liguori to conclude that if the gradus propinquior were the first or second, it should be expressed in the petition.

He could hardly have committed such a mistake as to suppose that duplex impedimentum, meant an impediment of consanguinity in the second degree. It is evident that he did not fall into this error, for immediately afterwards, when discussing the question regarding a duplex impedimentum (n. 1138), he adopts the opinion of Benedict XIV. on this subject, quoting the same constitution, Etsi, in support of his view.

I remain, Reverend Gentlemen, respectfully yours,

Dublinensis.

May 7th, 1865.

DOCUMENTS.

DECREE OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF PROPAGANDA.

I.

DECRETUM.

S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide habitae die 12 Aprilis, 1802.

Quum nomine Archiepiscoporum, Episcoporum, et Vicariorum Apostolicorum M. Britanniae S. Congregationi de Propaganda Fide proposita fuerint tria quaesita, nempe:

I. An Episcopi, Archiepiscopi, et Vicarii Apostolici M. Britanniae, qui facultatem habent a S. Sede Apostolica dispensandi cum Catholicis in nonnullis impedimentis matrimonialibus, iis facultatibus valide et licite uti possint in matrimoniis mixtis, nempe dispensandi cum parte Catholica, quae parti acatholicae nubere velit.

II. An Episcopi Hiberniae, qui ex jurejurando in consecratione praestito debent SS. Apostolorum limina singulis decenniis visitare, et status propriae Dioecesis relationem presentare, initium decennii sumere debeant a die propriae consecrationis, an primum decennium numerare a data 22 constitutionis s. Memoriae Sixti V. quae incipit, "Romanus Pontifex" et sic deinceps.

III. An dispensatio a SS. liminum visitatione, a Summo Pontifice Pio VI., die 7 Maji 1798 Episcopis et Archiepiscopis Hiberniae impertita cum clausula "quamdiu praesentes rerum circumstantiae perduraverint", ad praesens cessaverit.

Eminentissimi Patres, referente R. D. P. Dominico Coppola, Archiepiscopo Myrensi secretario respondendum esse censuerunt.

Ad I. Negative; et supplicandum esse Sanctissimo pro sanatione in radice omnium matrimoniorum, quae cum hujusmodi dispensationibus ad haec usque tempora contracta sunt: Iisque dandam esse instructionem anni 1774 ad Episcopum Culmensem transmissam.

Ad II. Incipiendum esse primum decennium a die constitutionis summi Pontificis Sixti V. quae incipit "Romanus Pontifex". Si vero Episcopi circa ultimum decennii annum consecrati visitationem explere ac relationem status suae Dioecesis transmittere nequeant, ab Apostolica S. Sede prorogationem expostulent.

Ad III. Praedictam dispensationem cessasse. Datum Romae ex Ædibus dictae S. Congregationis die 20 Octobris 1802.

S. Cardinalis Borgia, Praefectus.
Dominicus, Archiepiscopus Myrensis, Secretarius.

Loco ✠ Sigilli.
(Copia vera, Richardus Armacanus).

II.

TWO DECREES OF THE PROPAGANDA, CONFERRING THE PARISH OF COOLOCK AND THE PREBEND OF WICKLOW ON THE LATE MOST REV. DR. MURRAY, ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN.

We publish those decrees to preserve them from the fate of many other important documents. Being connected with the history of one of the most illustrious prelates of the diocese of Dublin, they possess a peculiar value and interest. The benefices referred to had devolved to the Holy See, because Dr. Ryan, the previous incumbent, had been promoted to the episcopal rank.

DECRETUM

Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide.

Quum per promotionem R. D. Patritii Ryan ad officium Coadjutoris in Ecclesia Fernensi in Hibernia apud Sedem Apostolicam vacaverit Parochialis Ecclesia de Coolock, Dioecesis Dublinensis cum adnexis, quam dictus Patritius in titulum obtinebat, Sacra Congregatio ex potestate sibi facta a Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Pio Divina Providentia P.P. VII. Lutetiae Parisiorum, Parochialem Ecclesiam praefatam cum ei adnexis benignè contulit Reverendo Domino Danieli Murray, Presbytero probitate doctrina, ac zelo a R. P. D. Archiepiscopo Dublinensi commendato.

Datum Romae ex Ædibus dictae Sacrae Congregationis die 26 Januarii 1805.

A. Card. Dugnani Pro-Praef.

Dominicus Archiepiscopus Myren. Secretarius.

DECRETUM

Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide.

Die 11 Martii 1805.

Quum per promotionem R. D. Patritii Ryan ad officium Coadjutoris Ecclesiae Fernensis in Hibernia vacaverit et adhuc vacet Canonicatus, sive Praebenda de Wicklow, quam dictus Patritius obtinebat in Majori Ecclesia Dublinensi, Sacra Congregatio, utendo facultatibus sibi tributis a Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Pio, Divinâ Providentia P.P. VII. durante ejus absentia ab Urbe, dictum Canonicatum, sive Praebendam de Wicklow cum omnibus juribus, et pertinentiis suis benignè contulit R. D. Danieli Murray Presbytere Saeculari viro doctrina, ac Religionis zelo, caeterisque virtutibus a R. P. D. Archiepiscopo Dublinensi specialiter commendato.

A. Card. Dugnani Pro-Praef.

Dominicus Archiepiscopus Myren. Secretarius.

III.

LETTER OF THE IRISH BISHOPS TO THE PROPAGANDA, 1801.

Dublino 19 Novembre 1801.

I Metropolitani e Vescovi d'Irlanda sotto descritti amministratori del Collegio di S. Patrizio adunati qui, letto il grazioso biglietto di Monsignore Secretario di Propaganda indirizzato al Padre M. Concanen sotto il di 7 23 Agosto prossimo passato, lo pregano d' umiliare loro profondissimo divoto rispetto e venerazione alla Santita di Nostro Signore, a cui professano la piu viva riconoscenza per la paterna sua sollicitudine ed attenzione ai loro interessi e doveri.

Quanto al consaputo piano ideato dal Governo Brittanico in supposto vantaggio della Ecclesiastica Gerarchia in Irlanda, Monsignore Segretario è già informato dei loro Sentimenti dal dettagliato riscontro che ne diede L'Arcivescovo di Dublino all' Emo Signor Cardinale Borgia, Pro-Prefetto allora della S. Congregazione: Dichiarano ora che non adotteranno verun piano che non sia conforme alle massime inalterabili della nostra santa Religione ed ai diritti della S. Sede Apostolica, tenendo per nullo ed invalido qualunque piano Ecclesiastico che non sia dalla medesima autorizzato e confermato. Desiderano ardentemente che il plausibile sistema da loro finora osservato sia seguitato, ed asterranno scrupolosamente d' aver in mira qualunque loro proprio temporale vantaggio trattando col Governo Brittannico, a cui professano la piu disinteressata ubbedienza e gratitudine.

Presentemente non si parla dell' ideato progetto, nè si parlerà prima della publicazione del nuovo Concordato tra la S. Sede ed il Governo Francese, a norma del quale in alcuni supposti articoli si regolerà come se dice, anche questo Governo.

Intanto bramano vivissimamente i Metropolitani e Vescovi d'Irlanda dalla paterna sollicitudine e saviezza del Santo Padre quei maggiori lumi che stimerà, opportuni per schiarire questo scabroso affare e regolare la loro condotta nel maneggiarlo nelle critiche circostanze in cui si ritrovano per l' infelicitá dei tempi presenti.

L' Arcivescovo di Dublino lo Scrivente nell' eseguire i voleri dei Metropolitani e Vescovi sotto descritti communicando questi loro sentimenti, si rassegna colla piu verace e distinta Stima, etc.

I Vescovo Accennati Sono.

Ricardo, Arc. Armacano.
Tommas, Arc. Casseliense.
Patrizio Giuseppe, Vescovo Midense.
Edmondo, Vescovo Elfinense.
F. Gio. Tom., Arcivo. Dubliniense.
Odoardo, Archivescovo Tuamense.
Giacomo, Vescovo Fernense.
Giovanni, Vescovo Ardaghadense.
A. Monsignore Segretario di Propaganda.

IV.

ADDRESS OF THE IRISH BISHOPS TO POPE PIUS VII. IN 1814, WITH THE PONTIFF'S REPLY.

In order to preserve the following valuable documents, we insert them in our pages. The first is an address of all the Irish bishops to Pius VII. on his return from captivity in 1814; the second is the Pope's reply.

I.

Spes denique revixit Christianis, et reparata est incolumitas Ecclesiae Catholicae, Salvo TE, qui CHRISTUM non magis auctoritate quam patientia repraesentas, atque divinitus ex iis erepto miseriis, quibus et vestrae Sedis Majestas et tuarum virtutum afflicta indignissime tenebatur, Sancte et Gloriosissime Pontifex Domine PIE SEPTIME Vir Dei. Quod ut evenisse singulis nationibus gratum est, quaecunque ad evertendam dominationem taedio servitutis exarserant; ut bonis jucundum omnibus; Catholicis vero exoptatum atque ingentis desiderii ac voti fuit: ita nobis, Beatissime PATER, qui primi omnium, vastata Re Publica Christianorum, ita doluimus, ut vel Populi illius Romani tui fletibus non minor de TE responderet gemitus noster; quique praenuntiavimus haud diuturnam futuram istam tantam crudelitatem; qui demum solemni obtestatione interdiximus, ne quis, TE oppresso, praerogativam Sacrosanctae Potestatis interciperet, non solum communis attulit fructum laetitiae, sed et victoriae jam nostrae laudem aliquam conjunctam atque cohaerentem admirabilibus triumphis TUIS. Itaque quorum fides tibi, B. P. in luctuosissimo rerum tempore invicta constitit, jam licebit caritatem et gaudia nostra ambitiosius in publica felicitate profiteri. DEXTERA tua DOMINE magnificata est in virtute: DEXTERA tua DOMINE percussit inimicum. Et in multitudine gloriae tuae deposuisti adversarios tuos: Flavit Spiritus Tuus et operuit eos mare.

Proximum est post tuam venerationem, B. P. ut amplissimum Senatus Tui Ordinem faustis acclamationibus prosequamur. Sed vero an ulla oratio nostra, aut ulla omnino laus par sit tam divinae constantiae declarandae? Qui cum a Tuo sinu avulsi in alios alii carceres et diversae exsilia includerentur, adeo non potentiae, non injuriis, non contumeliis submiserunt animum, ut praeclara jam apud omnes nominetur magnitudo animi illorum, fides, gravitas, pietas, innocentia. Immensa nempe laus, quam de ruina honorum suorum tanquam ex incendio ereptam, firmam sibi comparaverunt ad memoriam saeculorum omnium.

Nunc liceat apud TE, B. P. gratulari venerabilibus collegis nostris Episcopis Italicis, qui et confessionis titulo, et fidei erga TUAM SANCTITATEM splendidissimo crimine aerumnas, squalorem, minas cum vi et exsilio perpessi jam recreantur. Nec praetereundus Clerus ille vester Urbicus et Romanus fortis et sanctus, quos aut in insulam deportatos aut in Rhaetiam abstractos tyranni impotens furor persecutus est. Fruentur hi reduces tua BEATISSIME PATER, reducis eximia elementia. Fama certe illustri suo ipsi merito perfruentur. Scilicet multiplici experimento compertum est virtutem CHRISTI non posse obsolescere in Ecclesia Catholica: eundemque in TE tuisque vigere spiritum etiam nunc contemptorem mortis, qui et olim in sanctis Martyribus triumphaverit: ubi spiritus CHRISTI sit, ibi et libertatem esse consciam immortalitatis.

Attollat jam ipsa Urbs, Sanctorum hospita, religionis arx, depressum a gladiatorio servitio caput, seseque impune meminerit illam esse, quo ara foederis Christiani perpetua constituta sit: ubi Apostoli aeternum sedeant jura dicturi populis. Exsultent Martyrum cineres, et Apostolorum monumenta laetentur; vestraque, socii conditores non interiturae sub CHRISTO civitatis, PETRE ac PAULE, ad istam laetitiam ossa commoveantur, restituto PIO SEPTIMO vestris et suis sedibus.

Gratuletur etiam sibi felix BRITANNIA, quamvis a Fide nostra dissentiens, tropaeis onusta et rea voti tamen, quippe cui id firmum immotumque omni tempore insederit, ut obstaret grassanti impotentiae, debellaret tyrannos, pacem repraesentaret orbi terrarum. Enimvero haec princeps desperanti jam de vita saeculo et imperatrix signum extulit libertatis atque concordiae. Haec eadem Duces maximos aerarii infiniti prodiga et sanguinis suorum, exercitusque invictos, quaquaversum misit; etiam legiones fortissimas Catholicorum nostrorum: quorum in Aegypto, Italia, Lusitania, Hispania, Galliaque ipsa facta commemorabuntur. Huic igitur imperio tantam haberi oportet a Catholicis gratiam quanta ab hominibus ipsis debeatur liberatoribus humani generis; eamque TE, B. P. gratiam pro omnibus unum optime et nobilissime relaturum confidimus.

Postremum sancta genua cupidissime osculati, tuamque pro nobis et pro gregibus nostris Apostolicam Benedictionem flagitantes optamus, ut IS, TE Petri successorem, qui mirabiliter eripuit de manu Herodis, DEUS at DOMINUS noster JESUS CHRISTUS, diu prosperet, ac firmet solium tuum in pace.

Ex Regio Catholicorum Collegio Manutiano,
Ad diem v Kal. Jun. MDCCCXIV.

Subscriptiones Episcoporum.

II.

PIVS P.P. VII.

Venerabiles Fratres Salutem, et Apostolicam Benedictionem. Quantopere Litteris vestris V. Kal. Junias ad Nos datis delectati simus, satis explicare, Venerabiles Fratres, non possumus, eximiis adeo amoris erga Nos, et apostolicam sedem sensibus refertae sunt. Persuasos itaque Vos esse volumus officium, quo pro felici calamitatum nostrarum exitu nuper perfuncti estis, omni ex parte gratissimum Nobis accidisse. Sed et Venerabiles Fratres S. R. E. Cardinales, Italiae Episcopi, Clerusque Urbis universus ingentes perpetuo gratias vobis habituri sunt, quod ipsorum omnium fortitudinem, constantiam, fidem omni laudum genere prosecuti sitis. Etsi vero illius, quae Nos et totam Ecclesiam dirissime affligebat calamitatis cessatio dexteræ Excelsi adscribenda omnino sit: inter naturales tamen tam subitae, tamque admirandae rerum conversionis causas, principem facile locum BRITANNIA obtinet, quae thesauris, exercitibus, classibus suis, junctisque foederatorum Principum armis impia Tyranni Europam latissime vastantis consilia dispersit, viresque contrivit. Utinam DEUS OPTIMUS MAXIMUS ea nationi tam praeclare de orbe universo meritae beneficia retribuat, quibus veram, solidam, absolutamque numeris omnibus felicitatem consequatur. Quamvis autem Catholici vestrae curae commissi suis erga Potestatem, cui subjacent, officiis plane respondeant, nec bene, ut dicitur, currenti stimulos addere necesse sit: Vos tamen, Venerabiles Fratres, hortari eos, ut facitis, indesinenter pergetis, ne quid unquam committant, de quo merito reprehendi ab eadem Potestate possint. Cum omnes pastoralis officii partes tanto cum zelo, et animarum profectu impleatis, huic etiam Vos accurate satisfacturos non dubitamus. Paternae interim, praecipuaeque nostrae ergo vos charitatis pignus, Apostolicam Benedictionem Vobis, gregibusque vestris peramanter impertimur, Datum Romae apud S. Mariam Majorem sub Annulo Piscatoris die XXVII. Julii, MDCCCXIV. Pontificatus Nostri Anno Decimo Quinto.

Dominicus Testa.

Venerabilibus Fratribus Archiepiscopis et Episcopis Hiberniae.

NOTICES OF BOOKS.

I.

The Culdees of the British Isles, as they appear in History, with an Appendix of Evidences. By William Reeves, D.D. Gill, Dublin, 1864, pp. v.—163.

In treating of the life of St. Columba, some years ago, Dr. Reeves expressed his hope that he should have an early opportunity of dealing with the Culdee question in a special dissertation. Much to the satisfaction of all lovers of Irish sacred antiquities, among whom Dr. Reeves' reputation is deservedly great, this hope was realised towards the close of 1860, when the author read before the Royal Irish Academy two papers on the Culdees. These papers form the matter of the work under notice; and we propose to give an account of it to our readers as much as possible in the author's own words.

Before entering upon his subject, Dr. Reeves sets forth the object he has in view, and the method by aid of which he proposes to attain it. Persuaded that indulgence in speculation has brought great detriment to the cause of Irish history and antiquities, he puts forward in these pages "not so much his own views on the subject, as a comprehensive statement of trustworthy materials upon which to form a sound and philosophical opinion". With this object in view, but one method was open to him, namely, to collect and arrange all the scattered evidence upon the subject which his thorough and varied acquaintance with Irish, Scotch, and English materials of history, both published and unpublished, enabled him to accumulate. This he has done with fulness and precision, and having completed his task, he leaves it to the impartial reader to combine the details placed before him, and draw his conclusions for himself. Of this impartiality the author believes that he sets an example in his own proper person; whatever his private sentiments may be on the points at issue, he professes to hold them back. Not that he is cold or indifferent to his subject, for he declares that there is "one weakness, if it be a weakness, to which he must plead guilty, and that is, earnestness in the cause of Ireland's ancient dignity". By that earnestness we are all gainers, and the labours it has dictated to the author will always hold a high place in Irish literature.

The work consists of four parts, with a valuable appendix. The first part contains preliminary observations, and is divided into two sections—one on the origin of the name Céle-dé, or Culdee, the other being devoted to an analysis of that name. Part II. is entitled "The Céle-dé in Ireland", and consists of ten sections, respectively treating of strangers in Ireland called Céle-dé, of the Céle-dé of Tallaght, of Armagh, of Clonmacnoise, of Clondalkin, of Monaincha, of Devenish, of Clones, of Pubble, and of Scattery Island. Part III. is headed "The Céle-dé or Kelidei of Scotland", and has fourteen sections, the first being occupied with general remarks, the others with the Kelidei of St. Andrew's, of Dunkeld, of Brechin, of Rosemarkie, of Dunblane, of Dornoch, of Lismore, of Hy, of Lochleven, of Abernethy, of Monymusk, of Muthill, and of Monifreth. Part IV., on the Colidei of England and Wales, has two sections—one on the Colidei of York, the other on the Colidei of Bardsey. The appendix consists of evidences from authorities referred to in the essay, and constitutes a valuable collection of documents, the importance of some of which extends far beyond the question which they are here intended to illustrate.

In laying before our readers the substance of the contents of Part I., we shall take the liberty of inverting the author's order of arrangement, and commence by the analysis of the word. The name Célé-dé is composed of the two words céle and dé. The word célé is of frequent occurrence in the early Irish manuscripts, and is the usual gloss on the words socius, maritus, where they occur in the Wurtzburg copy of St. Paul's Epistles and the St. Gall Priscian. From this it passes into the pronominal sense of alius, alter, and the adverbial of seorsum. More rarely it has the sense of servus, and in O'Davoren's Glossary is explained by gilla = "a servant"; and with this interpretation it is found in modern Irish and Gaelic dictionaries. The other component, dé, is the genitive of Dia, "God", and is found as a kind of religious intensitive in combination with certain monastic terms, as anchorita Dei, monialis Dei.

Thus Célé-dé may mean "spouse of God", or "friend of God", or "servant of God". Dr. Reeves prefers the last-mentioned interpretation, for the following reasons. The devotion and self-denial peculiar to the monastic life procured for those who followed it the special designation of servi Dei, which in time acquired a technical application, so that servus Dei and monachus became convertible terms, ancilla Dei signified a nun, and servire Deo a monastic life. In this sense, as Dr. Reeves shows by numerous quotations, it runs through the works of the Latin fathers, the acts of councils, and the biographies of saints. The writings of St. Gregory the Great (called in Ireland Bel-oir, the golden-mouthed) recommended this meaning especially to Ireland, where that father was in the highest repute. "Familiarised, therefore, to the expression servus Dei, it is only reasonable to suppose that the Irish would adopt it in their discourse, and find a conventional equivalent for it in the language of their country. To this origin we may safely refer the creation of the Celtic compound célé-Dé, which in its employment possessed all the latitude of its model, and in the lapse of ages underwent all the modifications or limitations of meaning which the changes of time and circumstances or local usage produced in the class to whom the epithet was applied" (pag. 2). Of this there are many examples: thus—1, the Four Masters, in the Irish Annals of 1595, apply the term to the Dominican Friars of Sligo; 2, the Book of Fenagh uses it of St. John the Evangelist; 3, in the Book of Leinster and the Book of Lismore, St. Moling, Abbot and Bishop of Ferns (ob. 697), classes himself among the céle-n-Dé, and implies that his associates were the miserable, that is, the sick and lepers; 4, In Scotland, whither the term entered with the Scotic immigrants, we find in the middle of the thirteenth century certain ecclesiastics entitled Keledei sive Canonici. Hence Dr. Reeves is of opinion that the term Céle-dé was not a distinctive name borne uniformly by any one order, but a term of most various application—now borne by hermits, now by conventuals; now regulars, now seculars; now those bound by poverty, now those free to hold property. Even when they became relaxed and corrupt, they retained their ancient name. Speaking of the Kelidei of St. Andrew's in Scotland, Dr. Reeves believes that the estate of matrimony was no disqualification for the office of a Kelideus; while Van Hecke, the Bollandist (Acta SS. Octobr., tom. viii. p. 166, b), from the same passage of the Historia draws the very opposite conclusion. When at last Céle-dé does become a distinctive term, it is only so as contrasting the old-fashioned Scotic monks with the children of mediaeval institutions.

The name Céle-dé is taken by Toland, O'Reilly, and O'Curry, to mean "spouse of God", and to contain an allusion to the celibacy, the seclusion, and the devotion of the ancient monks of Ireland. But Dr. Reeves thinks that there is an incongruity in the expression "spouse of God", and the nature of the compound does not require such an interpretation. No doubt sponsa Dei does occur in ecclesiastical language for monialis, but he has not been able to discover an instance where sponsus Dei has been used as an equivalent for monachus.

The York Chartulary, Giraldus Cambrensis, and the Armagh records, make Céle-dé = colideus and coelicula, as if céle was equivalent to the Latin colo. Thus Céle-dé, would be the same as the Latin word Deicola. The English name Culdee grew out of the form Culdeus, first introduced by Hector Boece, and sanctioned by the practice of George Buchanan.

One of the earliest examples on record of the use of the term Céle-dé occurs in the Life of St. Findan, published by Goldastus (Rer. Alamannicar. Scriptores, vol. i. p. 318). This saint flourished in the year 800, and his life was compiled not long after.

In the first section of Part II. it is shown that the Céle-dé were not supposed by the Irish to be peculiar to this country. In section the second the community at Tallaght is noticed as presenting to us, if we may credit certain Irish records, the term Céle-dé in a definite sense, and in local connexion with a religious institution. In the rule composed by Maelruain the members of that community are styled Céle-n-Dé, either in the sense of an order strictly so-called, or more likely in the sense of "ascetics", or "clerics of stricter observance". As to the rule of St. Carthach of Lismore (printed from O'Curry's MSS., pag. 112, 172, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, vol. i. part 1), Dr. Reeves observes that "if it be a genuine composition, or even a modernized copy, it will follow that the Céle-dé were a separate class previously to the year 636, when St. Carthach died, and that they were distinct from the order called monks"—(pag. 8). Now of the whole family of monastic rules to which St. Carthach's belongs, O'Curry writes that "of the authenticity of these pieces there can be no reasonable doubt; the language, the style, and the matter are quite in accordance with the times of the authors". 24

In Armagh, the Colidei were officiating attendants at the altar and choir, before 1126, when the introduction of the canons regular diminished their influence and importance. They were, however, continued in their endowments and religious functions, but in a less prominent position. Their head became precentor, and the brethren performed the duties of vicars in the choir. At Clonmacnoise they were connected with an hospital; at Clondalkin, Monahincha, Devenish, Clones, Pubble, and Scattery, they had establishments more or less important.

From Ireland the Colidei passed into Scotland, the primitive history of the Church of which is essentially Irish in its character. The Keledei of Scotland appear for the first time in the history of St. Kentigern, or Munghu, as compiled by Jocelin at the close of the twelfth century from much earlier authorities. They were understood by the Scotch, in the twelfth century, to have been "a religious order of clerks, who lived in societies, under a superior, within a common enclosure, but in detached cells, associated in a sort of collegiate rather than coenobitical brotherhood—solitaries in their domestic habits, though united in the common observances, both religious and secular, of a strict sodality. Such was the nucleus of the great city of Glasgow". Pinkerton says of them: "The Culdees were surely only Irish clergy. In the gradual corruption of the monastic order they married, and left their Culdeeships to their children". But he is mistaken in deriving their origin from St. Columba; no doubt they were found in lapse of time in churches which that saint or his disciples founded, but in Dr. Reeves' opinion their name was in no way distinctive. Irish annals have only one mention of Céli-dé as existing in Hy, and that example is of so late a period as 1164. F. Van Hecke, the Bollandist, says: "Ceterum et nos quoque ejus sumus opinionis ut nullam inter Columbranos monachos et Culdees cognatsinem intercessiore credemus"—(Act. SS., Octob., tom. viii. p. 166 a).

It would far exceed our limits to follow Dr. Reeves in treating of the Scotch Kelidean houses.

In York, at the dissolution of monasteries, there existed an hospital called St. Leonard's, the chartulary of which tells us that in 836 King Athelstan found in St. Peter's Church, York, men of holy life, called Kolidei, who maintained out of scanty resources a number of poor men. The king, in return for their prayers, and to enable them to do good, granted to them a thrave of corn from every plough-land in the diocese of York, a donation which existed until a late period under the name of Peter-corn. The community founded an hospital which was afterwards called St. Leonard's. "The presence of this community in York is a curious vestige of Irish influence, discernible amidst long continued Saxon usage, which, as we learn from Bede, was, in ecclesiastical polity, antagonistic to the Scotic system".

In Wales, the Isle of Bardsey, off Carnarvon, alone offers an example of Céli-dé. Giraldus Cambrensis describes them in his Itinerarium Cambriae, 2, 6, p. 865.

The practical value of Dr. Reeves' work is much increased by an excellent index.

II.

Joseph Carriere, late Superior-General of the Sulpicians, and Vicar-General of Paris; St. Sulpice and the Church of France in his time. By T. J. O'Mahony, D.D., D.C.L. Dublin: Mullany, 1865, pp. 193.

FOOTNOTES.

1 (return)
No. viii., May, pag. 375.

2 (return)
In the article we refer to the learned author (pag. 379) writes that the name Mechar and Machar are "clearly one and the same name". Their identity is indeed quite manifest in the extracts from our Irish writers, to which we will just now have occasion to refer.

3 (return)
Page 376.

4 (return)
For further accounts of the O'Meachairs see the first volume of Cambrensis Eversus, by the late lamented Dr. Kelly, pag. 269. See also the Four Masters passim, where they are called the dynasts of Ui Cairin.

5 (return)
Misericordias Domini: Histoire de ma conversion au Catholicisme. Par le Doct. Hug. Laemmer, Pretre du diocese d'Ermland, Traduit de l'allemand, pp. 206. Casterman, Tournai, 1863.

6 (return)
1, Prague; 2, Vienna; 3, Friburg; 4, Munich; 5, Olmutz; 6, Graetz; 7, Würzburg; 8, Munster.

7 (return)
1, Tübingen; 2, Innspruck; 3, Breslau; 4, Bonn. These are called paritarian universities: with the exception of the Faculty of Theology, all the other faculties are Protestant. There are two Faculties of Theology, one Catholic and the other Protestant.

8 (return)
1, Heidelberg; 2, Leipsic; 3, Rostock; 4, Greifswald; 5, Marburg; 6, Koenigsburg; 7, Jena; 8, Kiel; 9, Halle; 10, Göttingen; 11, Erlangen; 12, Stutgardt; 13, Giesen; and 14, Berlin.

9 (return)
See Farrar's Critical History of Free Thought, pag. 390.

10 (return)
The Kirchen-Zeitung and the Kreuz-Zeitung are the organs of this body.

11 (return)
Father F. Mertian, of the Society of Jesus; Etudes, etc., par les Péres de la Compagne de Jesus. No. 32, May, pag. 59.

12 (return)
The Tübingen School and its antecedents; a Review of the History and Present Condition of Modern Theology. By R. W. Mackay, M.A. London: Williams and Norgate.

13 (return)
No. 5, July, 1863, p. 235.

14 (return)
Apologia, page 63.

15 (return)
On the condition of the Protestant church in Germany, see Döllinger's "The Church and the Churches", page 267, M'Cabe's Translation, 1842.

16 (return)
Father Perrone makes frequent reference to Hengstenberg's Biblical labours, especially in tract. de Incarnatione, part I.

17 (return)
The following are some of the works published by Dr. Laemmer since his conversion:

1. Ευσεβιου του Παμφιλου Εκκλησιαστικης Ἱστοριας Βιβλοι Δεκα. Eusebi Pamphili Historiae Ecclesiasticae libri decem. Graecum textum collatis qui in Germaniae et Italiae bibliothecis asservantur Codicibus et adhibitis praestantissimis editionibus recensuit atque emendavit, latinam Henrici Valesii versionem passim correctam subjunxit, apparatum criticum apposuit, fontes annotavit, prolegomena et indices adjecit D. Hugo Laemmer, Presbyter Varmiensis. Fasc. I. Cum tabulis duabus Specimina Codicum septem continentibus. Scaphusiae sumtibus librariae Hurterianae. MDCCCLIX.

2. De codicibus Recensionibusque Historiae Ecclesiasticae Eusebii Caesariensis scripsit D. Hugo Laemmer, 1860.

3. Anecdota Baroniana, ex codd. MSS. collegit, selectaque specimina edidit D. Hugo Laemmer. Rome, 1860.

4. Monumenta Vaticana, historiam ecclesiasticam saeculi XVI. illustrantia. Ex tabulariis S. Sedis Apostolicae secretis excerpsit, digessit, recensuit, prolegomenisque et indicibus instruxit Hugo Lämmer. Una cum fragmentis Neapolitanis ac Florentinis, 8vo.

18 (return)
Analect. praef.; also part i. p. 39, et seqq. See also Curry's Historical Memoirs, p. 39, seqq. Some late Protestant writers have not hesitated to assert that the bloodhounds were unknown to the executors of English law. However, the testimony of Dr. Roothe, an eye-witness, who often shared the perils of his flock, is unimpeachable; and, moreover, in the present instance, we have his testimony confirmed by the charter of James I., published in Proceedings of Royal Irish Academy, authorizing Henry Tuttesham, in 1614, "to keep four men and twelve couple of hounds in every county of Ireland, for seven years". Although the permission was granted, in order to destroy the wolves which infested the country, we know from several authorities how such permissions were perverted, by the ingenuity of the persecutors, to compass the destruction of the Catholics. See Proceedings of Royal Irish Academy, vol. ii., p. 77.

19 (return)
This sketch is sec. 8 of the Relatio entitled "Brevis informatio ad Illmos. D.D. Cardd. S. Congreg. Prop. Fidei, de statu Religionis in Regno Hiberniae, et praesente ejus necessitate, exhibita die 4 Febr. 1623". Ex Archiv. S. Congregat.

20 (return)
These tombs were repaired about twenty years ago by the late Dominick O'Reilly Esq., of Kildangan, county Kildare, a sincere lover of his country and its antiquities.

21 (return)
See Record, vol. i. part ii. pages 389, 390.

22 (return)
The date of the publication of the constitution "Romanus Pontifex" is 20th December, 1585.

23 (return)
For letter see Irish Ecclesiastical Record, vol. i, part ii. page 54.

24 (return)
Lect. xviii., pag. 373-4, vol. i.

Transcriber's Notes:

Minor obvious typographic errors have been corrected.

Inconsistencies in the usage of capitalization, accents and ligatures are preserved as printed.

This issue as printed ends with a summary for the book by T. J. O'Mahony, without an accompanying review.

A table of contents has been added for the convenience of the reader.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD, VOLUME 1, JUNE 1865 ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.