hand of the approval of his readers; and M. de Savornin Lohnan did not hesitate to place this negation of the Catholic Church before his coreligionists in Holland.

Since, then, the question has been taken up by men of such repute, it may be well for us to consider briefly some of the arguments brought forward. We may begin by stating that the accusations made against the Church in the original article are as old as the Church itself, and have been frequently disseminated since the time of St. Augustine' and Julian the Apostate. Theoretically the modern school of subjective rationalists recognize every religious belief, but in practice they do not extend their recognition to the Universal Church.

They hover like Milton's fallen angel over the waste of religious errors, throwing defiance at the sun, the light of the world, "O Sun, I hate thee."

We are informed by them that the Latin races are in a state of visible decline, and that the future of the world is in the hands of the Teuton and the Sclave; that the French, Spaniards, Italians, in short all of

1 See Klee's "History of Dogma,” vol. i. p. 71.

2 See Works of the Emperor Julian, published by E. Talbot. Paris, 1863.

Latin origin and blood, except perhaps those that combine something of a Genevan element ex stirpe Carteret, are degenerate; and that the Russians, the Prussians, and perhaps the Anglo-Saxons (though these latter are still too Catholic) are the nations now occupied in the resuscitation of the world.

The explanation of this phenomenon is, that all Latin races are afflicted with "cupertinage,"1 according to the word used by M. Prevost Paradol.

The nations that neglect themselves are peopled with monks; all the Latin races except the liberals of Geneva have the Catholic virus in their veins.

Such are the reasons given to show that they are both physically and morally corrupt, and that they are therefore condemned to an incurable disease.

The Teutonic races, on the contrary, are chiefly Protestant, and since Protestantism alone possesses the words of eternal life and the promise of immortality, the races that are Protestant increase and prosper, and

1 66 Cupertinage" is a covert allusion to the office of St. Joseph of Cupertino, which was introduced into France with the Roman liturgy. A polemical discussion on this subject arose between men of letters, in which this word played a great part; and the cutting sarcasms of M. Louis Veuillot have become legendary in French journalism.

will continue to progress on the wings of purity and religion until the end of all things.

The Sclavonic races are mentioned with discretion; the present was not a suitable time to sing their praises.

In order that we may not be accused of distorting the ideas of the Liége professor we will content ourselves with an extract taken from the "Saturday Review." 1

"This pamphlet has now been translated into English, with a preface by Mr. Gladstone.

The preface does not add much to the value of the composition, but it may serve the object it was probably designed to fulfil, and aid the circulation of the book in England. Even without his aid the work ought to please English readers, for it shows the immense superiority of Protestantism over its rival, and demonstrates how much more rich, free, happy, and prosperous are the adherents of the reformed than the adherents of the unreformed faith.

This to us is an old tale, but old tales are often true, and to most Englishmen it seems a proposition equally true and gratifying that all worldly and most spiritual advantages are on the side of Protestantism.

M. de Laveleye also points out that it is the peculiar evil of Catholicism that it corrupts its opponents and drives them into revolutionary despair. They seldom escape from the direct influence of the system in which they have been brought up, and are as positive they are right as ready to grind to pieces all who

"Saturday Review" of June, 1875.

differ from them, and as ready to abuse power if they get it as any ecclesiastical faction.

They have nothing better to offer to the world than a bundle of negations and a general abhorrence of piety; and, as M. de Laveleye most justly observes, man cannot live without religion.

The general conclusion M. de Laveleye arrives at is a most melancholy one. The reader naturally thinks that all this laudation of Protestantism, this insistance on the necessity of a creed, must end in an exhortation to his countrymen to turn Protestants, but there is not a word of this in the pamphlet.

M. de Laveleye discusses the relative superiority of Protestantism and Catholicism, just as if he were discussing whether Mars or Venus was the larger planet. There was a time when many Catholic countries, and especially France, might have been Protestant, but the golden opportunity was allowed to slip by, and, as M. de Laveleye evidently thinks, cannot be regained.

Catholic countries are destined, he seems to consider, to be eternally the prey of alternate ecclesiastical and revolutionary despotism; but they are not destined to become Protestant. In short, they always believe too much or too little, and so Protestantism is not made for them.

Protestantism is thus a royal road to human happiness, which is closed to all except those whose princes happened to take a particular side in the sixteenth century.

There is much more of truth in this than Protestants have ever taken the trouble to recognize; but it is impossible to discuss how far it is a true theory, and why and what limitations are to be put upon it, without entering on theology.

In the sphere of politics, however, it must be admitted that a Belgian is much to be pitied who witnesses the fierce dissensions by which his country is torn, who sees even darker days coming, and who has also come to the mournful conclusion that the only

way of escape that Belgians could have is barred to them by the blindness of their ancestors."

First of all, it is necessary to ascertain what species of Protestantism it is that these modern reformers advocate and approve.

Is it that of Henry VIII. or of Luther; is it that of Calvin, of Zwingle, or of Knox?

Is it Quaker or Puritan; Presbyterian, Congregational, Independent, Baptist, or Mormon?

Is the deity that they worship the god of Herr Sydow of Berlin, or, according to the language of M. Thiers, the "bateleur" god of M. Guizot?

Is the Christianity they recommend that of Dr. Colenso, or of Herr Bunsen; is it the Puritanical conception of the late Herr von Gerlach, or the sensational Puseyism of the Anglican school of thought; is it the liberal Protestantism of M. de Pressensé, or the Protestantized liberalism of Professor Bluntschli; is it the Calvinistic State-worship of M. Carteret, or the Hegelian Lutheranism of Prince Bismarck? M. de Laveleye has not informed us.

Such an omission may possibly constitute the cleverness of a diplomatist to the benefit of the public for whom he writes, but it reveals a doctrinal weakness that is easy to detect.