Title: The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Volume 1, June 1865
Author: Various
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Volume 1, June 1865" ***


THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD.

JUNE, 1865.



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.


[Footnote 1: No. viii., May, pag. 375.]

[Footnote 2: 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.]

[Footnote 3: Page 376.]

[Footnote 4: 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.]

[Footnote 5: _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.]

[Footnote 6: 1, Prague; 2, Vienna; 3, Friburg; 4, Munich; 5, Olmutz; 6,
Graetz; 7, Würzburg; 8, Munster.]

[Footnote 7: 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.]

[Footnote 8: 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.]

[Footnote 9: See Farrar's _Critical History of Free Thought_, pag. 390.]

[Footnote 10: The _Kirchen-Zeitung_ and the _Kreuz-Zeitung_ are the organs
of this body.]

[Footnote 11: Father F. Mertian, of the Society of Jesus; _Etudes_, etc.,
_par les Péres de la Compagne de Jesus_. No. 32, May, pag. 59.]

[Footnote 12: _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.]

[Footnote 13: No. 5, July, 1863, p. 235.]

[Footnote 14: _Apologia_, page 63.]

[Footnote 15: On the condition of the Protestant church in Germany,
see Döllinger's "_The Church and the Churches_", page 267, M'Cabe's
Translation, 1842.]

[Footnote 16: Father Perrone makes frequent reference to Hengstenberg's
Biblical labours, especially in tract. _de Incarnatione_, part I.]

[Footnote 17: The following are some of the works published by Dr. Laemmer
since his conversion:

1. [Greek: Eusebiou tou Pamphilou Ekklêsiastikês Historias Bibloi
Deka.] 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.]

[Footnote 18: 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.]

[Footnote 19: 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.]

[Footnote 20: 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.]

[Footnote 21: See _Record_, vol. i. part ii. pages 389, 390.]

[Footnote 22: The date of the publication of the constitution "_Romanus
Pontifex_" is 20th December, 1585.]

[Footnote 23: For letter see _Irish Ecclesiastical Record_, vol. i,
part ii. page 54.]

[Footnote 24: Lect. xviii., pag. 373-4, vol. i.]

       *       *       *       *       *


Transcriber's Notes:

In the "Documents" section, the symbol for a "Maltese Cross" has been
represented using [+].

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.





*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Volume 1, June 1865" ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.