took place in the Assembly precisely on the question whether religious Congregations ought to be allowed to teach-or rather (for this was the real question) whether the Congregations were to be allowed to exist. In this discussion M. Thiers took a prominent part. Among other things he said: "It is the Constitution, not we, that admits the Congregations to teach! We shall have the Jesuits opening schools,' you say; but how, in the name of your principles, can you help that? Under the old régime, with its limited freedom, that was possible; but you will have no restrictions on freedom. You despise the old régime, and yet here you are adopting one of its small tricks, its petty jealousies-you say, 'We will have no more of the Jesuits."" And liberty carried the day by a large majority. But the Left were not content. A second attempt was made to exclude the Jesuits from the schools. M. Thiers interfered again, and implored the Assembly to do one thing at a time-to pass the School Law first, and then, at some future time, to discuss whether a Congregation should exist or not. He was listened to; the School Law was voted; it was arranged that within a year's time a Bill on Associations should be brought in. But the year passed, and nothing was done, and nothing has been done up to the present moment.

No sooner was the School Law of 1850 passed than the Congregations, accepting that law as their warrant, opened schools everywhere. The Religious Orders, especially the Jesuits and the Dominicans, claimed and enjoyed, during the eighteen years of the Second Empire, full liberty of association, and full liberty of teaching. After the war, there was, to say the very least, the greatest hesitation on the part of governments and majorities in adopting any measure which seemed an interference with freedom of religious association. There was a discussion on the very subject in 1872, and an influential deputy, M. Brisson, declared, amidst marks of general approval, that no one wanted to revive the laws which forbade "religious association." In 1875, the Government presented to the National Assembly a Bill on Higher Education. This Bill expressly derogates the well-known clause in the Penal Code, in favour of "teaching associations" for higher education; and when the question of the "religious" was again raised, the Reporter of the Committee declared there was no need to discuss the matter. "Religious liberty," he said, " is not less admirable than other kinds of liberty, and we have no right to exclude from teaching Frenchmen and citizens, merely because they believe themselves called to a sacred vocation." And the discussions on Article 7 of the Ferry Bill, are still fresh in every one's recollection. Both the Deputies and

the Senate knew very well that the real question at issue was the right of the Congregations to exist; and this gives force to the eloquent speeches made by such men as Dufaure, Jules Simon, and others, in favour of liberty. "I hold that clause," said the aged M. Dufaure, "to be a reactionary clause, contradicting a principle of the Constitution of 1848, repeated and organized in the laws of 1850 and 1875, and contrary to the very essence of a republic which lives by the spirit of freedom, as we declared in 1871." Not the least interesting part of M. Rousse's exposition is the conclusion, in which, partly following his predecessors, he demonstrates the difficulty, nay, the absolute impossibility, of putting the Government decrees in force. The strong hand can, of course, do anything; but there are some exercises of power which cause too deep a disturbance to be lightly ventured upon. We hear from France that this "Consultation" has already produced a profound sensation. The author's eminent position, his calm impartiality, his argumentative power, and the clearness of his style, have carried conviction to many who doubted. On the other hand, the Government threatens force and seems prepared to employ it; and the Radical papers are backing it up with energy and relish. What the 29th will actually bring forth, it is, as we have said, impossible to predict. The Jesuit Fathers have as yet given no sign of the course they will adopt. But meanwhile France and the Catholic world are praying. There are pilgrimages to Paray-le-Monial, to La Salette, to St. Michel. During the whole of the week beginning June 27 there are special devotions, now in the Rue de Sevres, now at Montmartre, now at the tomb of St. Geneviève, at Notre Dame des Victoires, at Notre Dame de Paris and the Crown of Thorns. In the provinces, all the great sanctuaries will be thronged. We cannot be sure that God will deign to humble the persecutor or to open the eyes of the blind. But we trust and know that He will give to His confessors strength in the hour of trial, and triumph at the last.

Notices of Catholic Continental Periodicals.

TH

GERMAN PERIODICALS.

(By Dr. BELLESHEIM.)

1. Katholik.

HE February number contains a biography of the late Very Rev. Dr. Molitor, Canon of Spire. He was born in 1819, at Zweibrücken, and applied to the study of law in order to be called in due time to the bar, but very soon afterwards took to theology. After being ordained priest, he was appointed vicar near Spire, and then nominated a Canon of the Cathedral. Widely and thoroughly accomplished in Theology, and Canon and Civil Law, he rose in the course of time to be one of the most influential men in Catholic Germany. Amongst his works, the following deserve special mention :"The Process Prescribed by Canon Law to be Observed in trying the Clergy," and the exposition of Innocent III.'s decretal "Per Venerabilem" in which that great Pope establishes the Holy See's indirect power in temporal matters. This work would of itself suffice to immortalize its author. Eminent for his knowledge of ecclesiastical law, Canon Molitor was summoned to Rome to be Pontifical Theologian in the Vatican Council, and afterwards was commissioned to translate Cecconi's "Storia del Concilio Ecumenico Vaticano" into German. Accomplished as an orator, Canon Molitor excelled also as a poet, and wrote many fine dramas. Some of these rival the best productions of our great German poets-e.g., "Claudia Procula" "Maria Magdalena," and "Julian the Apostate." They, for the most part, describe the formidable struggle between Christianity and Heathenism. As a similar war is waged in our days, Canon Molitor published a series of novels and romances denouncing the manifold false doctrines which the church has to deplore. The desire of the Catholic people that Dr. Molitor, who was also an eloquent preacher, should be nominated a Bishop, was not to be fulfilled, owing to political reasons; the King of Bavaria enjoying the privilege of nominating. February and March numbers contain a learned treatise on the idea of Personality according to St. Thomas. In the April issue we have the first part of a treatise on the Beatific Vision. The scholastic doctrine is very ably developed. After having expatiated on the several kinds of "species," by which we attain the cognition of external things, and established the absolute necessity that the intellect should be "proportioned" to the things it desires to know, the author discusses the doctrine of the "lumen gloriæ." He calls it "an inherent quality," and adheres to the doctrine of those divines who claim it as a privilege of the saints

The

in heaven. An exception to this common law is admitted by some theologians for the Blessed Virgin only. The light of glory as a supernatural habit influences reason and will; but as it is only a faculty, a further special divine assistance is required in order that it may be actually exercised. It is contained as a germ in sanctifying grace. After the perusal of these treatises bearing on the most sublime doctrines of metaphysics and dogmatic theology, the reader may repose and recreate his mind by going through the instructive contribution on the Frankfurt and Magdeburg "Confession books" of the fifteenth century. It is a common belief with Protestants that in medieval times, and principally in the period immediately followed by the socalled Reformation, even the very beginnings of spiritual life were unknown to the Catholic people. The church is taunted with having only insisted on the performance of external works, laying no stress on interior conversion and repentance for sin. One of the most striking proofs of the utter injustice of such a reproach is afforded by these confessions, which were largely used in Germany in the old Catholic times.

2. Historisch-politische Blätter. To the February issue I contributed an account of the very instructive work published last year in Paris by the son-in-law of the late Count de Montalembert, Vicomte de Meaux, under the title "Les Luttes Religieuses en France au Seizième Siècle." The contents of this work may be summed up in the following sentence: The history of French Protestantism in the sixteenth century is the history of religious toleration. It may surprise the reader, but it is true. Whilst Protestant England did not scruple to crush a religious minority by the most barbarous laws, surpassing even those invented by heathen governments against Christians, and whilst Germany saw established in her public law the principle of Cæsarism, which gives religious liberty only to the nobles, but not their subjects, Catholic France was sanctioning religious liberty even for those who professed a religion inconsistent with the official religious belief of the country. It cannot be denied that French Protestants were exposed to great hardships, or, to speak more accurately, that the civil laws which condemned to death whoever dared to profess any religion but the Catholic, and to disregard the public law which for centuries bound together the Church and civil society, were unrelentingly carried out against them. But it must be borne in mind that the French Kings in punishing heretics acted not so much as defenders of the Catholic religion, as in their quality of secular princes, whose kingdom was inseparably connected with the Catholic Church. But as soon as Catholic France became aware of the total uselessness of the severe punishments enacted by a legislation for use in times gone by the Huguenots under Henry II. were presently allowed religious liberty. The general feeling prevailing in that period in France was well expressed by the Chancellor l'Hôpital, when he uttered the "parole étonnante": "plusieurs peuvent être cives, qui non erunt Christiani." Certainly it cannot be denied that the exercise of the new religion was to be confined to a certain number of towns, villages, and

castles of the nobility; but, one would be grievously mistaken by assuming the reason of this measure to be hatred of religion. On the contrary it was dictated by love of peace which could be preserved only by such a law. It is to be observed that it was the very champion of the new religion in France, Henry of Navarre, who energetically exerted himself to enact such a partial exercise of religious liberty, the only safeguard of mutual forbearance of Catholics and Protestants. The accurate researches of the Vicomte de Meaux, irrefutably destroy also the inveterate mistake handed down from generation to generation, that French Protestants acquired religious liberty only by the Edict of Nantes; on the contrary, the latter only established in a more solemn form what they had enjoyed for twenty years and more. It may even be granted that French subjects professing the new religion were more favoured by law than Roman Catholics. We principally refer the reader to de Meaux's exposition of the peace of St. Germain (1570), which granted the Protestants "free access to the universities, schools, hospitals, and to all magistracies and honours, peculiar judges for deciding their trials, and also special burying-places." Nay, the perusal of the work forces one to observe, that in consequence of religious liberty, Huguenots very soon became a State within the State, and so grew to be an evident danger to France. Eminently worth reading are the chapters bearing on the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, the accession of Henry IV. to the French throne, and the new life which sprang up in the French Church in the reign of Henry IV. The Massacre of St. Bartholomew has nothing to do with Catholic religion, or Catholic interests. The Dowager Queen, Catherine de Medicis, whose cunning and craft were only exceeded by her "affetto di signoreggiare," unfortunately exercised an almost unlimited power over her son Charles IX., and mother and son must be indicted before the tribunal of history as being concerned in this crime. A question of the utmost importance was before Catholic France in 1584 when the last of the Valois expired. The next heir to the crown was Henry of Navarre, the leader of the Huguenots. Was a Protestant by the public law of France allowed to wear the crown? Evidently not. When the Paris Parliament met, a decree was issued stating that the "most Christian King" ought to be a Frenchman and a Catholic. No sooner, therefore, had Pierre d'Epinai, Archbishop of Lyons, and orator of the League, announced the purpose of Henry to return to the Catholic religion, than the civil war was brought to an end. Henry IV. was instructed by the bishops in the religion of his ancestors, professed the faith July 25, 1593, in St. Denis, and not only remained faithful to his religion personally, but also exerted himself to improve the condition of the Catholic Church in France and fulfil the commands which the Holy See had laid down, when he was reconciled and admitted to the Catholic religion. Amongst these conditions rank foremost the education of the heir apparent in the Catholic religion, and the foundation of two convents in every province and in the country of Béarn. Hence we see the religious life flourishing as it had seldom done