THE TABLET

A IVeekly Newspaper and Review. Vol. 35. No. 1552. London, January 8, 1870. P r ic e 3d. S t am p e d 6d. [R eg ister ed for T ransmission A broad.

C hronicle of t h e W e e k : The

Archbishop and T he T a b l e t— Another Perversion of Facts— NonCatholic Fairness— Catholic Chaplains at Liverpool — Periodical Atheism — Pious Irreligion— Irish Elections— The New French Ministry— France and the Council— The Spanish Crisis — The Pontifical Debt— S. Joseph, Guardian o f the Church—The “ Saturday Review” >-* . A f l i r t ^ " P r t n r t l P f n m A f A r N- r* Ana tne x apai r r o iu o t c i ■ & c........................................................ 33 L eaders :

The Secular System at Work. . 37 American Ultramontanes . . 38 Men and Monkeys. . . . 3 9 “ Janus.”— No. IV. . . . 4 0

CONTENTS.

E ducation :

Present state of the Question in

Ireland............................................ 41 T he A nglican M ovement :

Consecration of Dr. Temple— His

Sermon at Exeter . . - 4 3 R ev iew s :

V i o l a ............................................ 43 The Two Sisters . . . - 4 5 Les Contradictions de Monseig­

neur Maret . . . . 4 5 Legends of the Saints . . . 4 6 S hort N otices : The Messenger of the Sacred Heart of Jesus—The Student’s Manual of Oriental History — Macmillan’s Magazine— Mottoes and Aphorism» from Shakspearc— The Spanish Mother — Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine. . . .... 46

C orrespondence :

Mr. Rhodes on the “ Visible Unity of the Church” . . . . 4 6 De Dominis . . . . . 4 7 The Church stronger than Heaveu. 47 “ The Evidence for the Papacy” . 47 Mr. Brace’s Manual of Ethnology. 47 L e t t e r from R ome ; Christmas in

Rome—The Bourbons—The Weather— Rectifications—What a Free Church can tolerate in a Free State —The Councill Hall . . . 4 8 Official Documents . . . .50 D io cesan N ews . . . . 5 1 B r it ish an d I r ish N ews :

Great Britain . . . » 5 2 Ireland ...... 52

F oreign N ews :

Russia : The Shores of the Cas­

pian and our Relations with the Inhabitants....................................53 M em o randa :

Religious : Letter of the Arch­

bishop of Westminster to the Bishop of Orleans— F. Christie on Infallibility, “ Janus,” and Mgr Dupanloup . • 54 Educational . • • 55 Literary • 55 Weather "and Health ’ . . 56 Statistics. . 56 Fine Arts . 56 M iscellaneous . 56

C H R O N IC L E O F T H E W E E K .

SOME journals of the Continent, follow­

ing the suggestion of the Bishop of Or1 i • T ' ^ j r 11 ^ leans, and some m England, iollowing '“ tablet.” their own, have informed their readers that

T h e T a b l e t is the organ of the Archbishop of Westminster, and have attempted to fasten upon his Grace a certain responsibility for its contents. The statement is neither true nor respectful. It is worth •while, therefore, to repeat what we said in the second number of T h e T a b l e t , that the Archbishop neither is, nor will be, responsible for any newspaper. We feel and believe that there is no one more thoroughly trusted by the Catholics of Great Britain, nor any more sincere friend to Ireland in England, nor any one in more complete harmony with the mind of the Holy See than our venerable and learned Archbishop. I f T h e T a b l e t , therefore, were written ■ under the dictation or supervision of his Grace, the gain we feel sure would be that of our readers, through the additional prudence, wisdom and authority, which would be communicated to our pages. But as it happens we can pretend to no such advantage, justice to our readers and respect Ruins Grace seem to suggest that we should say so once more, especially now that our circulation has become so largely

ANOTHER TERVERSION OF FACTS.

increased both at home and abroad. The Times correspondent has again indulged himself in an ingenious distortion of facts, whereby he has succeeded in making it appear that the Fathers will enjoy no liberty of speech. A Bishop,” he says, “ say from Rome or Germany, may send to the Committee sitting at the Quirinal in good Latin, and most carefully keeping in view everything that has been ruled by the Church, a proposition or observation that he may wish to make next Tuesday, upon the questions already announced.” The correspondent of course goes on to picture to himself how the Committee will reply that it is ■“ informal, not within the scope of the Council, contrary to sound doctrine,” and so on, too late for the Bishop to throw it into another shape. One would have thought that it had been sufficiently explained by this time, and certainly that it was well enough known at Rome, whence the correspondence is dated, that the “ Committee ” in question has nothing whatever to do with any observations which any Father may desire to make upon questions already before the Council. They have merely to take it into consideration, and report upon any fresh subjects which any of the Fathers may wish to have submitted for discussion. When any question is once before the Council every one will have an opportunity of saying what they wish to say. Nor can we see that their speaking in the order of precedence will be the hardship which the Times correspondent appears to think it will be. France and Germany will not necessarily be behind any one else. A German or French Cardinal

N ew Series, N o. 62.

will speak before an Italian Archbishop, and before an Italian Cardinal too, if he happens to be of older creation. As a matter of fact, according to this rule the Archbishop of Paris would have a right to speak before the Archbishops of Westminster or Malines, and the Bishop of Orleans before the Bishops of Nîmes or Rodez. It is as broad as it is long.

In the January number of the Diplomatic NON-CATHO- Review, Mr. Urquhart writes thus : “ I am L i e f a i r n e s s . noj. a Catholic, yet I should refuse to hold intercourse with the man who, professing to believe in the Church, denied the authority of its Chief, just as I should with the subject of a King who conspired against his Sovereign.” The same periodical quotes the saying of a Mussulman, a high officer of State, respecting the propriety of a declaration by the Council of the Vatican as to the circumstances which render a declaration of war sinful : the child of Islam said to a Christian prelate, “ In so far as this Council is religious, I have no right to speak ; but on this point, which regards justice, I can say that it would be a benefit to the whole human race. It further appears to me that, in a religious point of view, the Council is bound to this declaration, whatever the penalties which it might thereby incur.” It is a pleasure to notice instances of fairness towards the Church among nonCatiiolics.

catholic -A very interesting and important discussion chaplains respecting the remuneration of Catholic Chap-

at lains in workhouses and other establishments Liverpool. piace jn j]ie Liverpool Select Vestry on Tuesday last, and the well-known local newspaper, the D a i ly Post, devotes an able leading article to the subject. Mr. Turner, one of the churchwardens, was in the chair, and the subjoined resolution was moved by Mr. Martin :—

That, in the opinion of this board, it is undesirable that the religious teaching and instruction of the Roman Catholic inmates of the Workhouse and Industrial Schools should be dependent upon the voluntary attendance of the clergy of that denomination ; and, that, with the view of remedying the same, steps be taken to secure the services of one or more Roman Catholic clergymen whose duties shall be to attend to the religious wants of the Roman Catholic inmates, who shall be officers of the Select Vestry, and who shall be paid adequate salaries for their services. We may as well say at once that, on a division, there were eleven votes for the motion and eleven against it, whereupon the question was decided in the negative by the casting vote of the Chairman. The Liverpool paper before us remarks that it is no wonder that the speeches against Mr. Martin’s resolution “ were intensely bigoted and foolisli— no wonder that one vestryman wanted the matter left to Parliament, in order that he might be relieved of his responsibility— no wonder that another, forgetting that in any case the Catholic ministrations would go on, protested against Mr. Martin’s proposals, because the entrance of the Priests would jeopardize the souls of the paupers— no wonder, we say, that ordinary vestrymen