pastor of a popular Church, having no taint in its composition of the present bitterness of Christians against their better brethren, but composed indiscriminately of those who, though of many complexions, are of one Lord, one faith, one baptism. John S. Rock will sit as judge where now not one of his race can sit as a juror even when those of their own color are on trial for their life; and the perfection of justice will be consummated, and God the judge of all be satisfied then, and then only, when one of this blood whom our late chief-justice declared had no rights, shall occupy his seat* as the administrator of equal rights to all the land. Such a one is the Queen's highest judicial representative in Jamaica to-day. Such will be America's in Washington to-morrow. us. Such are some of the results and obligations which spring from that national decree. The work is not yet accomplished. Our brothers yet pine in prison-houses, and suffer unto death on the bloody field. The foe is yet stiff-necked and rebellious. It may be long ere the high lands of perpetual peace are reached. We may see days as dark as any which have covered Yet the end is sure. The grand uprising assures its coming. Does it also that higher, that diviner end to which the whole creation moves? Will the nation, will the Church, will every Christian, every minister, every man gird himself for this greater task? If so, that higher glory will speedily dawn. The sun will rise that knows no setting. The kingdom of Christ will be established. The whole earth, one family, will dwell in him, knit together in love, in labor, in faith, in joy; while over it all will bend the cloud of witnesses, with celestial faces, the martyred and sainted dead of every age and clime, not the least in honor and happiness those of our own *These particular results we presume our respected contributor hails, not as desirable in themselves, but as symbols of a great progress and a just reparation. We coincide with him so far as to hold that all legal disabilities precluding such results should cease to exist. Suffrage irrespective of complexion, but conditioned upon a degree of education, is both just in itself and essential to the well-being of our republic. A pariah caste in our free North will ever be a danger and a calamity; of which education and suffrage are the sole Christian, republican, and politic remedy. At the extreme south the ballot in the hands of the Afric-American is the best and most peaceful possible insurance of loyalty to the government. It is little less than practical treason to the perpetuity of the Union to place the disfranchised colored loyalty of the cotton states beneath an oppressive disloyal superstratum.-ED. a = age and clime, reliving happiest lives in their more saintly renown. "For all they thought and loved and did, And hoped and suffered is but seed Of what in these is flower and fruit." ART. VI.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE. ROMAN CATHOLICISM. THE POPE'S BULL AGAINST MODERN CIVILIZATION-Parties within THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.-The Encyclical or apostolic letter addressed under date of December 8, 1864, by Pope Pius IX. to all Roman Catholic bishops, is one of the most remarkable documents which in modern times has emanated from the Papal See: The pope reminds the prelates that his predecessors have never failed to state and condemn the errors against the fundamental principles of religion spread throughout society, and in particular against the Roman Catholic Church. He adds that from the commencement of his pontificate he has invariably rebuked these errors in his allocutions delivered at the Consistories, and in his frequent Encyclical letters to the bishops. Seeing, therefore, that errors and false opinions are constantly upon the increase in religious and lay society, the pope declares that he addressed himself to the bishops upon the present occasion to excite their zeal to confute error, and to arrest the evil which false ideas of religion, philosophy, and politics inflict upon the modern world. The Eucyclical letter then proceeds to enunciate the gravest errors which must first be confuted. These are stated as the opinions of those who say, that civil progress requires society to be governed without reference to religion, or without any difference being made between the true faith and heresy; that liberty of conscience and of public worship are essential in a well-organized government; that the will of the people, as displayed by public opinion, or by other means, constitutes a supreme law and a true right, and that accomplished facts in political affairs are to be regarded as rightly in force; that religious orders are not entitled to exist, and ought, consequently, to be suppressed; that family society is dependent solely upon civil law, so that the government has the exclusive right of regulating the relations between parents and children, and of directing instruction and education; that the clergy should not be permitted to take part in public instruction, because they are opposed to progress. The pope further condemns the opinions of those who hold that the laws of the Church cannot have binding force unless they are promulgated by the civil authority; that excommunications pronounced against usurpers of the rights and property of the Church are an abuse; that the Church has not the right of punishing those who violate her laws; that the ecclesiastical power is not by divine right distinct from or independent of the civil power; that obedience may be conscientiously refused to those decrees and decisions of the Holy See which do not affect points of faith. All these opinions and several others are rebuked, proscribed, and condemned in the Encyclical letter, and the pope prohibits their being in future entertained by true believers. The Apostolical letter is accompanied by an appendix ("syllabus ") of eighty propositions, containing the principal modern errors inveighed against by the pope. Seven refer to Pantheism, naturalism, and absolute rationalism; sever to moderate rationalism, four to religious indifference, twenty to errors against the Church and her rights, seventeen to errors current in civil society and their relations to the Church, nine to errors of philosophy, ten to errors connected with Christian marriage, and six to modern liberty and the temporal sovereignty of the pope. The following are among the most important condemned errors: 15. Every man is free to embrace and profess the religion he shall believe true, guided by the light of reason. 17. At least the eternal salvation may be hoped for of all who have never been in the true Church of Christ. 23. The Church has not the power of availing herself of force, or any direct or indirect temporal power. 24. The Roman pontiffs and œcumenical councils have exceeded the limits of their power, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even committed errors in defining matters relating to dogma and morals. 32. The personal immunity exonerating the clergy from military law may be abrogated without violation either of natural right or of equity. This abrogation is called for by civil progress, especially in a society modeled upon principles of liberal government. 39. The state of a republic, as being the crigin and source of all rights, imposes itself by its rights, which is not circumscribed by any limit. 47. The most advantageous conditions of civil society require that popular schools open without distinction to all children of the people, and public establishments destined to teach young people letters and good discipline, and to impart to them education, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power for the teaching of masters and opinions common to the times. 55. The Church must be separated from the State and the State from the Church. 77. In the present day it is no longer necessary that the Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all other modes of worship. 78. Whence it has been wisely provided by law, in some countries called Catholic, that emigrants shall enjoy the free exercise of their own worship. 79. But it is false that the civil liberty of every mode of worship and the full power given to all of overtly and publicdisplaying their opinions and their thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people and to the propagation of the evil of indiffer ence. 80. The Roman pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself to and agree with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization. The Encyclical has not ceased since its publication to be a prominent topic of discussion for the entire press of the civilized world. The Catholic press are unanimous in accepting it. By Catholic press we understand solely those papers, whether ecclesiastical or political, which profess an unconditional attachment to the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, and to the authority of the pope as its head. The number of since 1848, and every country of Europe these papers has considerably increased has now its Catholic organs, though their number, in comparison with the Protestant and liberal press, is everywhere insignificantly small. There were hitherto among the professedly Catholic papers two different parties as regards the relation of the Church to modern civilization, and, in particular, to that modern theory of society which demands the recognition of the separation of Church and State, the broadest relig. ious toleration, control of public educa tion by the state, abolition of all political privileges of the clergy, and other similar doctrines among the fundamental laws of every state. One party, the rigorous ultramontanists, reject this theory absolutely and uncompromisingly as false and contrary to true religion. The its at Rome, and the Monde of Paris, are Civilta Cattolica, the organ of the Jesuthe boldest and most gifted champions of this theory. Another party regards these views as one-sided and fanatical. It recognizes many good features in modern civilization, advocates a reconciliation and union between it and the Church, and demands in particular the enjoyment of equal political rights by members of different religious denominations. The ablest organ of this party is the Correspondant of Paris, among the editors of which are, or were, Count Montalembert, the late Father Lacordaire, Father Gratry, M. de Falloux, Augustin Cochin, and many other promi nent Catholics of France. Montalembert and Lacordaire have frequently and se verely criticised the fanaticism of Le Monde, and other ultramontane sheets; and Montalembert, at the Catholic congress of Belgium, in 1863, went further than any of his friends in the bold defense of the principle of religious toleration. The majority of the Catholic papers of the world have not directly taken part in the controversy. The Monde, of Paris, is, on the whole, the chief and the favorite source from which the Catholic press of the entire world derives its information; yet occasionally the large majority of Catholic periodicals have expressed the same views on religious toleration and modern society as the Correspondant. equal civil rights of members of nonCatholic religions. Thousands of Catholics, including priests, bishops, and cardinals, are every year taking the oath of respecting, maintaining, defending these constitutions. Will they deem it compatible with their duty as Catholics to remain loyally devoted to the liberal constitutions of their states? The most liberal among the Catholic countries of Europe is Belgium, whose constitution guarantees to every citizen personal freedom and liberty of conscience. Hitherto the "Catholic" party of that country has professed an equal attachment to the constitution as the Liberal party. The Monde, of Paris, has always represented the fundamental principles of the Belgian constitution as irreconcilably opposed to the spirit of the Catholic Church. The "Catholic" party of Belgium have generally avoided a discussion of the principles of their constitution, but regarding it as an ac By the Monde, the Civilta Cattolica and their partisans, the Encyclical was of course received as a great triumph. Henceforth, exclaimed the Monde, a liberal Catholicism will no longer be possible. Rome has expressly condemned, not only the false liberalism, but liberalism in general, and all good Catholics will now respect this decision of the Holy See. The editors of the Correspondant seem to have at first been doubtful as to what course to pursue. It was rumored that they would discontinue their organ, but this proves to have been unfounded. The Correspondant has at length published the En-complished fact, professed a determinacyclical, but with the remarkable reservation that it accepts it in the sense of those bishops who do not regard it as conflicting with modern civilization. Many Catholic papers undoubtedly entertain the same sentiments as the Correspondant; but, as far as we know, not one avowedly Catholic paper of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, or any other country of Europe, has uttered an open word of dissent. The same may be said of the bishops. Some of the recently appointed bishops of France, especially the Archbishop of Paris, are generally supposed to be Gallicans, and not to share all the views of the pope, yet all of them observe a respectful silence. It is, therefore, all the more remarkable, that a cardinal should be found openly to disapprove the language of the Encyclical. Yet such is the fact. Cardinal d'Andrea has had the more than ordinary courage to declare himself opposed to the views of the pope, and it is reported that six other cardinals agree with him. tion to adhere to it. Most of them, in accepting the Encyclical, contend that it does not in the least alter their relation to their constitution. Thus, according to "La Paix," of Brussels, one of the leading Catholic papers of Belgium, the pope only declares that truth is solely to be found in the Catholic Church, that error cannot claim the same rights as truth, nor vice the same rights as virtue. In this sense it fully adopts the bull, and maintains that dogmatically the pope must be intolerant. But the Catholic legislators, it further argues, are not challenged by the bull to punish the abuses of liberty of the press any more than they are commanded to punish blasphemers or other offenders against the precepts of the catechism. Other Catholic papers of Belgium apologize for their constitution by remarking, that at the time of the adoption of the constitu tion Belgium was not a purely Catholic country, and had to make concessions to the anticatholic liberalism. All these arguments admit, that in the opinion of Roman Catholics the doctrines condemned by the Encyclical are not desiraable in themselves, and ought only to be conceded when the Catholics find themselves in a minority. On the other hand, however, the conduct of the Catholics of Belgium, and most of the other countries, clearly indicates that they lack the courage to carry the pope's view into execution. In our own country the A point of great practical importance is the question whether Catholic citizens of states which have liberal constitutions can reconcile a sincere submission to the pope's Encyclical with a sincere loyalty to their state constitutions. Belgium, France, Italy, Austria, Bavaria, are states predominantly Catholic, but the constitutions of which recognize the FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XVII.-18 25 Archbishop of Baltimore has made the singular discovery, that the papal anathemas are not at all intended against constitutions like that of the United States, but merely against the infidels of Europe. Such an assertion is not at all creditable to the candor and the intellect of the American prelate, but it shows that the representatives of the pope in this country do not dare to make a practical application of the views of Rome to our institutions. The papal party itself, as we have seen, acknowledges but timidly the papal manifesto, and refuses to carry it out. But the papal party is now in a minority in probably every country of Europe. In Paris there are only four daily papers, which claim to be regarded as Catholic papers, against more than a dozen which respect neither the ecclesiastical nor the temporal authority of the pope. In Vienna, a single Catholic daily is with difficulty sustained by the high aristocracy; and in Austria, in general, more than five sixths of all the political papers are decidedly anticatholic. The same is the case with the press of Turin, Florence, Milan, Madrid, Lisbon, Cologne, and the other large Catholic cities of Europe. Everywhere one or two Catholic papers are with difficulty sustained, while all the leading papers are decidedly liberal. Of the Catholic governments of Europe there is not a single one which has expressed its concurrence with the views of the pope. Italy and Austria have allowed its publication, but expressly reserved the rights of the state, and carefully guarded against indorsing it. France and Spain have prohibited its official promulgation by the bishops, and new conflicts between Church and State seem to be the inevitable consequence. Thus Europe has repelled the last attack of the papacy upon the progressive spirit of the age; and according to all signs of the times, Rome will now have enough to do to keep herself on the de fensive. THE GREEK CHURCH. INTERCOMMUNION BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN AND THE ANGLICAN CHURCHESRUSSIAN MISSIONS-THE BIBLE IN RUSSIA. The movement toward establish ing intercommunion between the Anglican and the Oriental Churches, is beginning to enlist considerable interest among the Russians. An interesting account of the disposition of the heads of the Russian Church with regard to this subject was published last year by the Rev. Mr. Young, the secretary of the Russo-Greek Committee, appointed by the last General Convention of the Prottestant Episcopal Church of this country, who in the first months of the year had visited Russia, and conversed with some of the prominent men of the Church. In St. Petersburgh he had an interview with the Procureur General and the ViceProcureur General, who are the emperor's representatives in the Holy Synod. They referred him to the Metropolitan of Moscow, Philaret. Mr. Young had two interviews with the Metropolitan Philaret of some three hours each, the Vicars of the Metropolitan, (Bishop Labas and Bishop Leonide,) together with the rector of the Spiritual Academy of Moscow, two interpreters being present on each occasion. The conversation consisted chiefly in the asking and answering of questions as to the doctrines and ecclesiastical position of the Anglican and the Russian Churches. It was arranged that the chief portions of the Anglican prayer-book should be translated into the Russian language. The Metropolitan expressed his gratification at the interview, and at the prospects of more friendly and intimate relations of the two communions. The Russians are especially beginning to acquaint themselves better with the literature of the Anglican Churches. An association of ladies has been formed for the dissemination of theological and general reading matter. The association has been in operation about a year, and has its depository at Moscow. The books kept at the depository and destined for circulation are: 1. Church books, (all the books indispensable for the service of the Church,) Bibles, Testaments, Prayer-books, etc. 2. The writings of the fathers of the Church, popular sermons, explanations of the Bible, and in general, books relating to the history, doctrine, and the rites of the Church. 3. Books concerning the history and geography of Russia, travels, descriptions of the country, biographies, popular songs, and standard works of our most eminent writers. struction, and entertaining books for 4. Juvenile literature, books for inchildren, carefully selected." |