such organic change in the constitution of the ecclesiastical commission. Such persons,-and they are the only persons whose opinion is of any importance, will view any proposition of the sort with extreme suspicion and dislike, especially coming from the quarter it does. The party who wish to create a new source of patronage at the expense of the church, are no friends of the Protestant religion, except so far as it suits their own convenience. Their whole conduct in Ireland,-where all the weight of their influence is to discourage and discountenance Protestantism,-proves that religion and truth are, in their estimation, matters of secondary consideration in any case, and, in deciding on a question of political expediency, of no consideration whatever. The zeal for the efficiency of the church that this report would assume, does not carry conviction along with it. People are not in the habit of expecting such a feeling from this quarter; and these expressions of affectionate concern rather excite suspicion and distrust, and put churchmen on their guard, especially when at the end comes out the politico-hygeian nostrum of three paid commissioners. Why there should be three, no one can imagine; except that it will afford two more places to give away, than if there were but one. Least of all can those persons understand the utility of this proposal, who have any information respecting the mode in which this nostrum has operated in the ecclesiastical commission in Ireland; where it is notorious, that all the business which a paid commissioner is required to do, can be done by one person, and is actually done by the commissioner appointed by the archbishops. It may be very convenient to certain parties to have a well-paid sinecure to give to a practising barrister, especially when the payment is to come out of the funds of the church; and to those who wish to discountenance the Protestant religion, it may be equally convenient to have a paid official in the commission to carry out their objects. But, if the welfare of the church, and the efficiency of the commission, are to be promoted, it must be by some other methods than any that are likely to be thought of by persons who have no other scheme to propose than this. In whatever light it is viewed, it is impossible to remove the distrust which has been excited by this project for creating two new placemen, to be appointed by government, and paid for by the church. No professions of religious zeal can reconcile it to the good sense or the good feeling of the country. It is, in fact, understood to be a feeler. It is but too obviously the first step towards a more serious attack on the property and independence of the church. 715 A PUZZLING COINCIDENCE. IN the Tablet for August 19th, appeared the following letter: "ST. THOMAS OF CANTERBURY. To the Editor of the Tablet. Sir,-On my return from Rome last year, I visited Verona, in order to try to obtain part of the relics preserved of St. Thomas of Canterbury, in whose honour a Bishop of Verona had built a large church in that city not long after his martyrdom. Upon representing to the actual Bishop how great a treasure it would be in England, I obtained from him part of the Saint's skull. When I returned to England, I was urged authoritatively to give it to some church, so that it might occasionally be exposed for the veneration of the Faithful. I shall, accordingly, give it to St. George's Church, provided that I receive subscriptions sufficient to have a reliquary made worthy to receive so valuable a relic as part of the skull of St. Thomas of Canterbury, one of the Patrons of England, and her most glorious Martyr; otherwise I shall return what I have already received, and keep the relic for myself. Mr. Pugin has made some beautiful designs for a reliquary, which will cost between 2001. and 3007., and I have already, by private exertions, collected 907. from my personal acquaintances. I now, therefore, earnestly entreat Catholics in general to come forward and subscribe to so holy an object. GEORGE TALBOT. Feast of the Assumption, B.V.M. Presbytery, St. George's Catholic Church, Southwark." If the exposure of any part of any one's skull to their veneration can do the faithful, or any one else, any good, it seems rather unkind of Mr. Talbot to threaten to keep the relic for himself, unless two or three hundred pounds are raised for a reliquary. And the threat wears somewhat of an undutiful aspect also, since by his own account Mr. Talbot has been urged authoritatively to give it to some church, where the faithful may have an opportunity of bowing down and worshipping it. However, the likelihood of his obtaining a sufficient sum for the reliquary seems rather endangered by the following letter, which is printed in the second edition of the Tablet for August 26th: "THE RELICS OF ST. THOMAS OF CANTERBURY.-To the Editor of the Tablet.—Sir-In the Tablet of the 19th inst., there is a letter signed George Talbot,' wherein he states that he has brought from Verona a part of the skull of St. Thomas of Canterbury. Now, I read in Alban Butler's life of the saint, That the bones of Thomas a'Becket, as also the skull, with the wound of his death, and the piece cut out of the skull, laid in the same wound, were in the shrine of the saint, and that these were burnt by order of Cromwell in September, 1538, 13 Henry VIII.' If this is a fact, how can any part of the skull have been at Verona? I hope I shall give no offence by making the inquiry, and am, Sir, your obedient servant, A. B.Bath, August 21, 1848." 3 c 2 This is puzzling. Yet after all, one may ask whether it is so very unusual for Romish saints to have more heads. One thing is certain, that if all their relics are not genuine, it needs an infallible guide to say which are the true ones. Mr. Talbot, however, does not seem willing to give up the genuineness of his relic without a struggle. "THE RELICS OF ST. THOMAS OF CANTERBURY.-To the Editor of the Tablet-Dear Sir,-In answer to your correspondent's note of the 21st instant, calling in question the authentication of my relic of St. Thomas of Canterbury by the holy and venerated Bishop of Verona, I have only to say, that Stowe, the Protestant authority whom Butler follows in this instance, cannot mean that every particle of the skull of St. Thomas was preserved at Canterbury, because the learned Baronius tells us that part of it was taken to Rome in the year 1172; and it is a common practice in the church for ecclesiastical bodies to assert that they have the head or the body of a saint, when in fact small portions have been given away. And so, no doubt, as Stowe says, 'the skull, with the wound of his death, and the piece cut out of the skull, laid in the same wound,' were religiously preserved at Canterbury, though some small pieces were wanting. The piece preserved at Rome is solemnly exposed for veneration on Easter Day at the Basilica of St. Mary Majors, and by special rescript from the Pope. I obtained leave on another occasion to hold it in my hands and examine it. So also, as it was a common practice likewise for the possessors of relics to give away portions of them to persons who had any claim to them, and who had the piety to ask for them, it seems natural that the sainted Bishop of Verona, who in the thirteenth century built a church in honour of St. Thomas, should have obtained from England, long before the time of Henry VIII., the pieces of the skull, and the three teeth of the saint, which are still venerated there, and out of which the present bishop gave me the portion which has given rise to this painful and unedifying controversy, and which he assured me in the most earnest manner was authentic. I take this opportunity of thanking those faithful and fervent Catholics who have already sent me their subscriptions anonymously, 'believing though they have not seen,' and I earnestly urge others to follow their holy example. I remain, dear sir, yours faithfully, GEO. TALBOT. S. Rose of Lima, 1848, Presbytery, St. George's Catholic Church, Southwark. How the assurances of the present Bishop of Verona can be sufficient to prove the genuineness of the relic, it is not easy to see. NOTICE TO CORRESPONDENTS. THE quantity of space which has unavoidably been occupied on account of the length and importance of the documents inserted in the article on Roman-catholic Unity, and also by furnishing our readers with a copy of the Report of the Select Committee on the Ecclesiastical Commission, has prevented the appearance o several other matters, including some reviews which were in hand, but which we are compelled to postpone. INDEX TO VOL. XXXIV. "Abbey Church of Tewkesbury, with a de- Abbot, Bishop, his visitation articles, 361 subscriptions transmitted to the Lord Address of thanks for the relief afforded to the Aylmer's visitation, 262 Baptism, administration of, by midwives, 496 "Brief Review of the arguments alleged in Bulteel's Relation of the Troubles of the Christian Clergyman, portrait of a, 188 College of St. Columba, 339 Corrections of the press, 321 Cosin, Bishop, his visitation articles, 362; Cranmer's visitation articles, 254 Cust, Hon. Sir Edward, review of his "Noc- Cyril, St., of Alexandria, 4 Damasus, St., 504 "Dean and Chapter News," 367 Education in Ireland, 436; opposition of the of suffering by the Protestant population, Edward VI., his injunctions, 242 Elizabeth, Queen, ceremony for the cure of Ennis, Dr., his pamphlet, 534 Episcopal visitations, of what they have con- "Eternal loyalty," declaration of, 289 Exorcism of unclean spirits, the, 123 "Fifty-two sermons, adapted to each Sunday in the year," by the Rev. Jeremiah Smith, Fletcher, bishop of London, his visitation, 263 Frere, James Hatley, review of his "Great Fuller's opinion as to the virtue of the royal "Glass paintings, an inquiry into the difference "Godly colleges," 534 Grindal's visitations and injunctions, 259 Hacket's "Memorial &c. of Archbishop Wil- Harrison, Archdeacon, extract from his charge, "The remembrance of a departed spiritual Hart's "Parish churches turn'd into conven- Haweis, Rev. J. O). W., review of a volume "Healing," the, 121; origin of the belief in persons resorted to Queen Elizabeth on occa- "Heresy, new test of," charge of the lord Heylin on the efficacy of the royal touch, 140 Horsewhip, recourse to the, by the Irish priest- Hughes, Rev. J., his letter to Lord Clarendon, Illustrations of Roman-Catholic unity, 615; Infallibility, the search after, 1, 166; St. Augus- Insurrectionary movement in Ireland, the, 228 Irenaeus, St., 164; on the intermediate state Irish rebellion, the Roman-catholic priests and Jephson, Mr., Rev. Dr. Hook and, 463 |