retaliates vigorously on his opponents, and his readers, even if not convinced by his arguments, cannot fail to carry away a clearer idea of the real questions at issue. The earlier portion of the book is devoted to a defence against the purely personal attacks of Professor Owen, and the author has no difficulty in making some good points against him. But what makes the book of real value to all who are interested in the question is the remarkably clear and powerful refutation of the claims made by Professor Owen and his friends for the vivisectional discoveries of Hunter, Harvey, and Lister. So far as the discussion has at present gone, Mr. Adams appears to have decidedly the best of it; and unless some clear and straightforward reply to his arguments with regard to these claims be speedily produced by the other side, it is not too much to say that the large majority of readers will be of opinion that the vivisectionists have been worsted on their own chosen ground.

Notwithstanding our sense of the effectiveness of Mr. Adams' vigorous attack it is impossible not to regret that a question so serious and so important as that of vivisection cannot be discussed in a calmer way than is the practice at present. It is not too much to say that one calm and really fair statement of the arguments on either side will bring us nearer to a conclusion of the question than years of sharp partisan practice.

HENRY BOWYEAR

WE

SOME OTHER BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS.

E can only say a few words of appreciation of two admirable addresses given at Manchester New College, London. The first is an Address to the Theological Students, delivered at the close of the Session 1881-2, by Rev. H. W. CROSSKEY, LL.D. (Manchester: Johnson and Rawson). Its subject is the relation between the work of the student and the Christian minister; and the importance is shown of a wide and liberal intellectual culture, including a knowledge of the methods and theories of modern science, as an essential part of the preparation for the ministry. The other address, entitled Religion and Liberty (Williams and Norgate), was given at the opening of the present college session by Professor JAMES DRUMMOND. It is an earnest plea for mental freedom in the study of theology and of all questions relating to religion, as a necessary condition of religious vitality and of the development of the spiritual life. Dr. Drummond takes a hopeful view of the present aspects of religious controversy; and he thinks that two important spiritual gains can already be discovered. "In the first place men are being thrown back upon the inner resources and primary essentials of religion; in other words, they are more genuinely religious. And secondly, as a consequence

of this, there is an increasing unity of spirit."

The Doctrine of the Cross, by Rev. E. P. SCRYMGOUR (G. Bell and Son), is an exposition of the doctrine of the community of sorrow and of

sacrifice. "In the act of sacrifice love is supported and informed by the light of Divine communion; and to bear that light in love is to enter into the sacrifice of Christ." The author keeps close to the realities of spiritual insight and experience; and his doctrine has very few points of contact indeed with the popular notions of the "scheme of salvation."

Reasonable Religion, by the Rev. D. P. FAURE, comes from Cape Town, where the author is minister of the Free Protestant Church. The volume contains nine thoughtful discourses on “Our Belief in God," and "Our Hope in Immortality." Mr. Faure's doctrine is practically the Theism of Theodore Parker, modified by some more recent ways of thinking and speaking on matters of religion. If we rightly understand his position, we wonder how he can think that the doctrine that there is nothing but "Nature self-originated and self-acting," differs only in name from his own Theism. In the same connection, however, he speaks of the self-styled atheist as acknowledging the existence of " Intelligence and Design," and if this is granted, of course the atheistic position is surrendered.

Nathan der Weise, edited with English Notes by Dr. BUCHHEIM, is the sixth volume of the German classics published at the Clarendon Press. The editor's name is a guarantee of careful and scholarly work, with a practical knowledge of the amount and kind of assistance which will be of most service to the student. Dr. Buchheim does not lose the opportunity of showing his appreciation not only of the literary quality of Lessing's great work, but of its noble lessons of charity and breadth of sympathy in religion; and the information he gives of the controversies which led to its production is very much to the point.

The following books, amongst others, must be reserved for future notice: The Life and Times of St. Anselm, by Martin Rule, M.A. (Kegan Paul); Life of Sir W. Rowan Hamilton, by R. Perceval Graves, M.A. (Dublin: Hodges); George Ripley, by O. B. Frothingham (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, and Co.); The Legend of Thomas Didymus, by J. Freeman Clarke (Boston: Lee and Shepard); R. W. Emerson, an Estimate of his Character and Genius, by A. Bronson Alcott (Boston: A. Williams); Pearls of the Faith, or Islam's Rosary, by Edwin Arnold, M.A. (Trübner); The Gospel of the Secular Life, by the Hon. W. H. Fremantle (Cassell); The Evolution of Christianity (Williams and Norgate).

THE MODERN REVIEW.

APRIL, 1883.

THE PRESENT STATE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN FRANCE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MODERN REVIEW."

THE

HE earnest and cultivated minds which England counts in such great numbers are always justly interested in what passes on this side the Channel. Now, the Catholic, or, to use the language of the day, the Clerical, question, is so mixed up here with political or social questions that your Protestant majority itself can scarcely remain indifferent to it. Certain recent conversations have made me feel convinced that your countrymen are but ill-informed on this subject, and that-by an error which is the more excusable that it very generally prevails amongst ourselves-you judge of the ideas and tendencies of the French clergy from publications such as the Univers, the Pélerin, and the Semaines Religieuses of our different dioceses, or by political discourses, such as those of Messrs. Lucien Brun, Chesnelong, Ernoul, &c. Nevertheless, there is an evolution going on at present in our ecclesiastical world, the consequences of which only wait for favourable circumstances to reveal themselves completely. Those who are afraid of them are redoubling their efforts to block up the way; but they will not in the long run succeed.

Now, in order to be understood, it is necessary to go a little further back. When, after the revolutionary storm, Napoleon the First negotiated with the Holy See for the restoration of the Gallican Church, his principal object, if not his only one, was to place the clergy at his own disposal, and to make them an instrument of domination. The method was simple. He had but to secure to the bishops of his choice absolute power over their priests; and, in keeping a hold on the former, he would have the latter under his control. Since then the bishops have done their utmost to escape in their own persons the pressure of government, and, on the other hand, have caused the full weight of despotism to fall upon the inferior clergy. Circumstances proved only too favourable, at the end of the Revolution, to the fulfilment of this part, at least, of Napoleon's detestable plan. The impossibility there then was of giving any practical validity to the greater part of the provisions of the secular law of the Church, made a tabula rasa of them in the eyes of the Vatican and the Tuileries alike. Hence this abnormal condition, in which the good pleasure of the bishops takes the place of all that is laid down by canonical laws.

This state of things has obtained for eighty years, and, far from seeming disposed to modify it, their Lordships have acquired such a taste for absolutism that they do not admit even the possibility of a different ecclesiastical régime. If two or three bishops have given signs of a desire to establish the observance of the law, they have shown themselves wanting in energy and perseverance, and their colleagues have, during their lifetime, combined to oppose to them that inertia which is the great weapon of their displeasure, and, immediately after their death, to undo the little they had accomplished. Such has been the fate of the attempts of Bishops Sibour, Darboy,* and De la Tour

* Mgr. Darboy procured the re-establishment, by Imperial decree, of the Chapter of Ste. Geneviève. The stalls were open to competition. He promised to regard the holders of them as irremovable, and counted upon finding amongst them, in course of time, curés for the principal churches in

D'Auvergne to restore ecclesiastical tribunals and examina

tions.

Rights count for nothing, the caprice of the superior is everything; nought by merit, all by favour; such is the state of the French clergy nearly a century after a revolution which was an inspiration of liberty to all around.

Thus, the law requires a competition for presentation to livings, and this competition ought to be held before examiners elected every year by the clergy of the diocese assembled in synod. These examiners alone are qualified to decide, not only upon the learning, but upon the antecedents, the fitness, the personal character of the candidates. From a list presented by them the bishop is to make his selection. If such a method were put in practice we might boldly affirm that an immense majority of the priests who occupy the great livings of France would occupy them no more. In Paris alone, out of sixty curés not ten would hold their positions.

Paris, and bishops for the provincial sees. This institution might have brought about a revival of ecclesiastical studies; so one of the first acts of Mgr. Guibert, on his arrival in Paris as Archbishop, was to put down the examinations, and, in violation of all justice, to disperse among the very lowest clerical positions the chaplains of Ste. Geneviève, whom his predecessor had inducted. Equally fruitless, ever since 1801, has been every spasmodic attempt to restore the status of the French clergy. Mgr. Darboy, himself, however, was on the side of right, in so far as it did not interfere with his own caprices. Witness the interdict which he launched against the Abbé Roy, whom he wished to deprive of the cure of Neuilly. He was fortunately irremovable; he appealed to Rome, and successfully; but the Archbishop, who was all powerful under the Empire, obtained from the Conseil d'Etat a decision opposed to that of the Roman Curia. He appointed an administrator of the parish, and, thanks to the general debasement wrought by the then Government in Paris, as in the rest of France, not a single protest was raised in favour of the victim. The affair only terminated under the ultramontane Guibert, whose spirit of opposition to the acts of the Gallican Darboy was laid, as by a spell, the moment there was any question of keeping the priests in their degradation, even in contempt of appeals to Rome. In the end a resignation was extorted from the unfortunate Abbé Roy, on condition of his nomination as an Honorary Canon of Paris; this being an implicit acknowledgment of his unblemished character, and of the injustice of the persecution he had undergone. It was easier to accede to his demand for this form of compensation than simply to confess to an abuse of power, and to make amends for it.