myths in Italy belong to the age of Romulus, seven centuries before Christ, if, indeed, Romulus can be called a myth. When the age of written monuments begins, the mythical period ends. Hence the Jewish people cannot properly be said to have ever had myths. And the man who talks of mythical beings in Judea during the reign of Tiberius, may undertake to persuade us that Napoleon III. is a myth. We know the current events of that period, year by year, and month by month. The Annals of Tacitus, the Commentaries of Cæsar, have not, even humanly speaking, the critical evidence in their favour possessed by the Four Gospels.

§ II.-Moderate Rationalism.

The errors of this section are all sprung from the same parent, namely, from the denial of the existence of mysteries, or of truths whose depth is beyond the understanding of man. The basis on which the condemnations contained in the section rest, is, firstly, the recognition of the fact that mysteries do exist, and have been revealed; secondly, the logical principle that the science of Faith, commonly called theology, must be conducted in a different manner from the natural sciences. To show the folly of the propositions herein censured, I ask whether a man would not be crazed who should try to settle the truth of the story of Hengist from Euclid? Of course he would, because he would be applying the principles of a purely abstract science to an historical question, which can only be solved by the testimony of trustworthy witnesses. Yet the absurdity of such an attempt is infinitely less than

that of trying to frame a science of Faith by the same means wherewith chemistry or natural philosophy are tc be studied. And now let us briefly review the condemnations that follow.

The eighth and ninth condemn the ridiculous system I have just referred to.

The tenth strikes at the error of implying that a man of science may outwardly accept and inwardly reject the dogmas of Faith, as if the philosopher indeed were subject to God, but human science were independent of the divine intellect.

The eleventh is aimed at the error of those who would fain take from the Church her power of defending the revealed deposit from the dangers that beset it through the abuse of reason.

The twelfth contradicts the insulting assertion that Papal decrees impede the progress of science. It does not touch the question whether, in any particular case, the act or decree of any Pope not speaking ex cathedra may have impeded the development of some particular scientific theory, true or otherwise; but condemns, as scores of learned Protestants have done ere now, the sweeping calumny of the enemies of the Holy See.

The thirteenth condemnation displays, even in a human sense, the most consummate wisdom. The author of the censured opinion means to treat faith and reason on the same level; but the full pith of the condemnation can only be felt by those who have fathomed the almost godlike intellectual strength of mediæval divines.

The fourteenth, after what I have said, needs no comment.

§ III.-Indifferentism. Latitudinarianism.

Every reader of the Bible must have met, in the writings of the Apostles, with sundry wholesome warnings against heretics, and for example, in the Apocalypse or Revelations of St. John, with fearful predictions of torments reserved for them. Of course we do not style those heretics who have entered the Church by baptism, and have never heard the truth of Catholicity sufficiently proposed for them to be able to embrace it; such as these may well be saved, and belong, as Father Perrone says, to the soul of the Church. But still we hold that there is no salvation for those who belong neither to the body nor to the soul of the Church, and we believe there is but one true Church of Christ. Hence we cannot admit the comfortable doctrines of the present batch of errors.

In the fifteenth condemnation therefore, the Pontiff simply inculcates the principle laid down by St. Paul in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romans, namely, that faith is obedience. There is but one true religion, and every man is bound to embrace it, and in so doing he obeys a Divine command. "He that believeth not, shall be condemned."-Mark xvi. 16.

The sixteenth denies that any synagogue of falsehood can be heir to the promises of Christ, and be our guide to life everlasting, according to the privilege of His Church.

The seventeenth censure is directed against the anti-Christian doctrine that communion with the Church is in nowise wanted for salvation.

The force of the eighteenth of the Papal censures

will be seen from the supposition implied in the error condemned.

The supposition is, that denials of a truth are simply different forms of the same truth, and that two antagonistic systems may be equally true, and alike the Word of God.

IV.-Secret Societies, Communism, etc.

As I find no propositions here, I may pass this heading over in silence. The reign of terror of Parisian Communism has more than justified the Pontifical censure passed on this class of errors.

§ V.—Errors concerning the Church and her rights. § VI.-Errors concerning the State considered both in itself and in its relations to the Church.

I put these two paragraphs together, as my prefatory remarks will apply to both alike. I may have to say over again something already said in a former pamphlet on the "Vatican Decrees," but shall study to be as short as possible. A few words on the Church in herself, and then on the Church in her relation to the State, will be a necessary introduction to my subject. Is the Church a society, or body politic? she a perfect or an imperfect society?

First, let us define terms.

If so, is

A society is a body of men conspiring together by united efforts for the attainment of a common end. We have in this definition four elements; the multitude of human beings, their moral union, the means of attainment of the end, and

the end itself. Thus the society called the British Empire consists of all Queen Victoria's subjects, linked together by the observance of the laws of the Empire for the attainment of temporal prosperity.

Of these elements it is plain that the first three form, as it were, the matter, or vague, undetermined part, and the last, the determining element, or form of the society. The end determines the means and is the vital principle of the whole structure. The means employed by a society whose aim is life everlasting, must be totally different from those made use of by the State, whose end is temporal welfare. The means employed for the attainment of the end of a literary club. are not those employed by a railway company. The social means therefore, and, consequently the very nature of a society, are to be determined from its scope.

Now for the distinction between perfect and imperfect societies. I said in a former pamphlet that the State is a perfect, a railway company an imperfect society. The imperfect society aims at a partial attainment of the end of the perfect society; the perfect society contains within itself the imperfect society, and is contained within no other having the same end as itself. There are but two perfect societies-the Church and the State, each, in its own sphere, independent and supreme; and every other society must be a part of one or of the other of these two.

But here I have been stating what I wish to prove, to wit, that the Church is a society. Well, let us see whether she has the four elements of the definition.

First, does she consist of a multitude of men? The answer is plain. Was it her Founder's will that these