so clear and comprehensive in statement that they body forth a perfect system for the administration of the Church, the training and regulation of the clergy, the religious instruction and edification of the people. A splendid tribute to the wisdom and piety of Cardinal Pole, as displayed on this occasion, is contained in the just remarks of his biographer, Sir Thomas Phillips. "The resemblance," he says, "of the decrees here made to those which the Council of Trent made on the same matters is very remarkable. Nor can it be replied, that the legate adopted what had been already ordained in that celebrated assembly; because whatever has any affinity to the statutes of the synod was not regulated till the last sessions of the council, which were held some years after the Cardinal's death. But it is not improbable that several of the Fathers who assisted at them were acquainted with what he had ordered on matters which they were to regulate, and that they prescribed to the whole Christian world what he had approved of for one national Church."

The scope of Pole's influence, however, extended far beyond the limits which bounded his efforts at reform. The news of his success in England had lifted him to the pinnacle of popularity abroad, and confirmed his right to a foremost place among the statesmen of Europe. Letters of congratulation poured in upon him. Among them it is a pleasure to find one from Ignatius Loyola, in which he expresses his joy at the happy turn of affairs, gives a cheering account of the Roman college, and points out its advantages for the education of such youths as the Cardinal might think proper to send. With scholars Pole had always been a favorite. Whatever had to do with the advancement of learning was sure to receive his hearty support. The universities of Cambridge and Oxford recognized this fact in his career, and testified their high sense of it by electing him chancellor. It was not until the 20th of March, 1556, that Cardinal Pole ascended to the priesthood. On the second day following he received consecration to the primatial see, at the hands of Nicholas Heath, Archbishop of York, assisted by six suffragans of the Province of Canterbury. His conduct as primate embodied what he had urged in synod; but though his zeal was ardent it was never fierce. The brief reign of Mary, in which he bore so prominent a part, has for three hundred years, whether justly or unjustly, been singled out for especial stigma. With the question in which that stigma originated we are but slightly concerned. It is a sufficient vindication for Cardinal Pole, if indeed vindication were required, that armed with powers above those of any ecclesiastic in the kingdom, at a time. when Parliament was hungry for slaughter, he set his face against persecution. The clemency of his nature only followed the dic

tates of his judgment. The weight of historical testimony in his favor reaches its climax when Burnet quotes him as saying: "Pastors ought to have bowels even to their straying sheep; bishops are fathers, and ought to look on those that erred as their sick children, and not for that to kill them."

It is sometimes the lot of good men to be utterly misunderstood by the good; and this bitterest of experiences was reserved for Reginald Pole when his course on earth was nearly run. No two men could offer a contrast more strongly marked than that exhibited by the Cardinals Pole and Caraffa. The habitual sternness and severity of the latter was the very antithesis to the tenderly gracious manner and nature of the former. Both aimed at the accomplishment of good, perhaps with equal conscientiousness; but the means used for its attainment were as dissimilar as their natures. The lenient and conciliatory policy of Pole in England. could never have been employed by the austere founder of the Theatines; and hence it happened that when Cardinal Caraffa became Paul IV. Pole's legative powers were withdrawn. Reginald bore up under the Papal displeasure with the unruffled calm which had characterized him under earlier trials; but, nevertheless, the shade had fallen on him from the seat of that authority. which he had strenuously upheld and defended throughout life; and it remained until it was lost in the deeper shadow of his death. This event took place on the 18th day of November, 1558. During the sickness which preceded it intelligence was brought him of the death of Charles V. and of the illness of Queen Mary, who was dying of the same disease which proved fatal to himself. Expressions of mutual sympathy passed between the sufferers. In sorrow and in joy their lives had taken the same course, and from the same causes. On the same day, it may be said, death sealed the harmony of their lives. The queen departed this life sixteen hours before the Cardinal. He had already received the sacraments when word came to him that Mary was dead; but, wishing once again to receive his Lord before seeing him "face to face," he would be brought before the altar. There in tears the dying Cardinal recited the "Confiteor" and communicated. He was brought to his couch. Vespers and compline were said in his presence; and shortly after, while his attendants read the prayers for departing souls, the last Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury entered into his rest.

A study of Cardinal Pole's character impresses us with the idea that he was morally, rather than mentally, a great man. His life, it is true, abounds in evidence of his intellectual pre-eminence, and the judgment of his age leaves us no room to doubt it; nevertheless, it is in the circle of duty, rather than in the arena of thought, that we are commonly led to regard him. We forget his rank as

ter.

a scholar, his dignity as legate, his influence on the intellectual activity of his day, in the contemplation of a life of serene endurance and constant self-sacrifice. His sufferings are ever before us, and if we rejoice in his successes and exult in the tributes conceded to his merit, it is mainly because they tend, in some measure, to their alleviation. It is the analysis of this feeling of sympathy which leads us up to the true conception of his characThe secret of his influence over us lies in his exquisite sense of right, and in his inflexible resolution in acting up to and abiding in it. His misfortunes flow from this source; and we are touched by them, not simply because they are misfortunes, but because they are incurred in defence of the right. His life is the expression of this principle. It is the only one which can afford a rational explanation of his conduct. The divorce was a gross violation of natural right, and therefore he opposed it. The schism was an outrage on revealed truth, and hence he devoted his life to the task of closing it. And it is this principle, too, which constitutes his charm, not only when it appears in affairs of public concern, but also as it is seen operating in those of a purely private and personal nature. If he is tranquil and patient under the annoyances which beset his various embassies; if, even though a Cardinal, he is accustomed to serve Mass at Viterbo; if he pardons the criminals who sought his life, and forgives their abettor; if, after the murder of his brother, he expresses, in writing, his willingness to lay down his life for the salvation of the king; or, in the Conclave, displays the heroism of perfect self-control; in all these things we recognize the grandeur of a soul which made its conception of right the aim and rule of action. His goodness is, beyond question, his strongest title to greatness. This fact is his highest praise; for the names of men intellectually great are common in history, while the names of those who were also pre-eminently good are comparatively rare.

THE RECENT ENCYCLICAL LETTER OF POPE LEO

XIII.

ON THE NECESSITY OF REINSTATING THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY

OF ST. THOMAS IN CATHOLIC SCHOOLS.

OF

F the many documents that have come forth from the Holy See within the memory of living men, few can be counted that surpass in importance the Encyclical which we have considered it a duty to place on record in the pages of our REVIEW. In this noble effusion of apostolic zeal and learning our Holy Father, Leo XIII., following in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessors, has thought fit warmly to recommend, both to those who are already learned and to those who are striving after true knowledge, the study of the volumes of St. Thomas Aquinas, known in the schools as the Angelic Doctor. He further discloses a praiseworthy anxiety to restore the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages and of our fathers to the old place of honor which it once held, and whence it has been cast down, or allowed to fall, through the contempt or negligence of our supercilious and superficial day and generation.

And if we but consider the fervid welcome and unbounded joy with which it has been everywhere received and greeted, it must be acknowledged that the Encyclical has met the wishes and gratified the cravings of the Catholic heart throughout the whole world. From every city of Catholic Italy, from the so-called centres of civilization, Paris, London, and Berlin, to the remotest isles of the southern seas, there has gone up to Heaven one common voice of praise and acclamation. Its words have evidently touched a responsive chord and awakened a thrill of delight in every orthodox breast. Nor is the reason of this difficult to understand. The Apostolic Letter emanates directly from the mind and heart of the great Pontiff himself, every syllable of it being manifestly his own; and we can only raise our hands in silent wonder, joy, and thanksgiving as we listen to those words of matchless eloquence which enhance, instead of impairing, the ardor and persuasiveness of reasoning and exhortation in which the Teacher and Father of the faithful pours out his whole soul to his children.

Nor has the Encyclical failed to elicit impartial consideration and even admiration from many of those who profess to regulate their philosophy and their religion by their own private judgment. And their calm, respectful examination and approval of the document may well make us forget the senseless ridicule or blind fury with which some writers, stanch disciples of the gospel of hate,

have assailed the words of the Holy Father. Acting on the foregone conclusion that nothing good can come out of Nazareth, they deliberately close their eyes and ears to the noble language, the unstudied tone of fatherly tenderness, the lucid statement of facts and reasons that would bring conviction to any unprejudiced mind. Others, while highly praising the Encyclical, cunningly pervert their very praise into a weapon of calumny, by which to overthrow the fixed, unalterable character of the teaching of the Church and its Supreme Head. They extol Leo XIII., but it is only to depreciate Pius IX. They tell us that Leo, in commending the study of philosophy, exalts reason, and has remedied the mistaken policy of Pius, who condemned it. This is sheer invention, as gratuitous as it is malicious. There is not a single word in the Syllabus of Pius IX. (for this is what is referred to) that can be tortured into. condemnation, or even the faintest shadow of censure, of human reason, its legitimate rights, or its correct use. If it does, let it be produced. It does not breathe on this matter a single syllable which every right-minded Protestant, who has not parted company with his former belief in revealed religion and Christianity, would not cheerfully subscribe to. It condemns those only who do not use reason, but abuse it; those who lift it out of its proper sphere; who make of it a judge of the mysteries of Christian faith; who contend that theological must be discussed in the same way as natural science; and, finally (not to enumerate them all), who are bold enough to say that philosophy must be treated without any reference to supernatural revelation. As if the speculation of any philosopher, had he even the mental calibre of an Aristotle, an Augustine, or an Aquinas, could possibly be true when in open contradiction with God's revealed Word.

It is these men, who trample on the mysteries, miracles, and teachings of the Old and New Testaments, who insult and blaspheme God and his revelation in the name of reason, that Pius IX. condemned in the Syllabus. And we should like to be told when or where they have ever found favor and approval at the hands of the present Pontiff. Not in the present Encyclical, surely; in which, like Pius IX., he teaches explicitly that reason must know her place and keep it, nor venture beyond her depth. Her duty, and it should be her highest boast, is to be the handmaid and follower (ancilla et pedisequa) of theology and revelation. She must never have the presumption to withdraw herself from the control of divine authority (non ita tamen, ut auctoritati divinæ sese audacter subtrahere videatur). Let her remember that it is trampling alike on faith and reason to accept as true any conclusion which is opposed to revealed doctrine (si conclusionem aliquam amplectatur, quam revelatæ doctrinæ repugnare intellexerit). In the next para