.

its application at various stages of Church History, it will be no matter of surprise that just at this present crisis of the never-ending war between the Church and the World, a new star should have arisen in the firmament of the Queen of Heaven, one whose rays were long ago perceived by doctors and saints in intermittent flashes, but which has now for the first time been brought into ceaseless view and made visible to the eye of each baptised member of Christ, to be his beaconlight in the tempest now fast gathering around him. Dr. Lee nowhere alludes in his sermon to the Immaculate Conception, totidem verbis, doubtless from a desire to avoid that which has been in England so almost universally misunderstood, and the proper and full explanation of which could hardly be given in the course of a single sermon. His expressions, however, are nowhere inconsistent with a full belief in this (for these days) "most wholesome and necessary doctrine." We say most wholesome and necessary; for a right understanding of it, involving as it does a full and clear recognition of nearly every separate detail of the Faith in connection with the Fall and Regeneration of mankind, is, to say nothing else, a most efficacious antidote and remedy for all that fast and loose theology, that hazy and promiscuous habit of thought and speech so common in our day, and which argues complete ignorance of those primary facts which lie at the root of the whole system of revealed truth. And if those too, who, though teaching a Gospel of Christ of their own making, are still sincere in their love to His Person, and are determined amid all the doubts and difficulties of our day to cling to Him, only knew how wonderfully His unapproachable dignity, His incomparable attributes are set off, so to speak, in heightened contrast against those of His Blessed Mother by the fact of her Immaculate Conception, and her need, notwithstanding this fact, of a Saviour, they would at once see in it "the anchor sure and stedfast," with which the Divine Teacher has furnished the Church in this, as many think, her last terrible struggle with the powers of evil. "The shield of Faith "is indeed to be the weapon with which we are to quench the fiery darts of the adversary, but as the darts are those of the nineteenth century, so must the shield be. If we therefore wish our shield to be impervious, let us hasten to add this new fold to its thickness, and in all our acts of faith let us not forget to include our belief in the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God.

If Dr. Lee's Sermons have a positive value in their bearing on the Re-union question, those of Chancellor Massingberd

have an equal value of a negative kind. If the former point out the way to Unity, by setting forth Catholic Truth, the latter point out more forcibly the need of it, by dwelling upon the growing dangers of the age and the spread of the Antichristian spirit all over the world. Mr. Massingberd has not yet arrived at Dr. Lee's stage of thought on these subjects. The road however is the same. The longing for Unity is genuine and sincere; and expressed, too, not only earnestly, but clearly and intelligibly. There is the same hope, the same expectant waiting, though not yet gladdened by those visions of dawn, which, however faint, are still really visible to those who have mounted higher on the same path. "Union with the Greek Church, not with Rome," is the Chancellor's ne plus ultra at present. May his Sermons have had the effect of leading his hearers even thus far, for they will most assuredly not stop there long! The volume, in addition to Four Sermons on Unity (three preached at Lincoln and one at Oxford) contains two interesting Lectures, one on Religious Societies and another akin to it on Wesley, to a possible reception of whose followers in the Church allusion is made in one of the Sermons. The volume will naturally find its way into the hands of many who would be too frightened to read a Sermon by the Editor of the Directorium. May it too in its measure do the holy and peaceful work intended by it!

G. F. C.

FRAGMENTA VARIA.

No. VI.- MR. MACCOLL'S EXPOSURE OF THE ANGLO-CONTINENTAL SOCIETY.

WE Copy the following important letter from the Guardian of August 5, 1868 :

SIR,-I read, some years ago, an essay by Mr. Meyrick on the "Theory of Equivocation," and his letter to this week's Guardian is a sufficient proof that he has mastered that theory in all its bearings.

I said that the Anglo-Continental Society was bringing discredit on the English Church by connecting itself with men of bad character in Italy. Mr. Meyrick replied that I "probably alluded" to a certain person who was in the pay of the AngloContinental Society; and that with respect to him the charge of immorality, which had been made against him, was "baseless." And then, in order to discredit my testimony, Mr. Meyrick quoted an impudent libel upon "six or eight English Priests," with an oblique hint that I was one of them. Mr. Meyrick made this quotation from "a Neapolitan journal;" but he did not think it necessary to tell your readers that the journal in question was in his own pay, and had for its editor the very man whose character was in dispute.

I met Mr. Meyrick's letter with a plain statement of facts, and this he characterises as "totally untrue," and declares that I am "misinformed on every point regarding which I profess to give information to your readers." Let us see.

I said that the editor of the Emancipatore Cattolico and President of the Società Emancipatrice was "a renegade Dominican Priest;" and as a proof of that assertion I mentioned that he had practically abjured not only his monastic vows, but even his character, by assuming the garb and address of a layman. Mr. Meyrick replies that "Signor Prota is not a renegade," but "an Italian Churchman,' 99.66 5 striving to reform his Church from within, on the basis of Holy Scripture, the Catholic Creeds, the Catholic Councils, and Catholic antiquity." Let Mr. Meyrick show me from any of these sources a sentence or syllable which indicates that "Catholic antiquity" regarded a Priest who broke his monastic vows and abjured his clerical character in any other light than as a renegade, and I will admit his right to monopolise the virtue of "a calm judgment." Till then I shall continue to consider "Signor Prota a renegade. But I am glad that Mr. Meyrick has avowed so plainly the character

of the reformation which he is seeking to bring about in Italy. It is well that the supporters of the Anglo-Continental Society should be aware that they are doing their best to reform the Italian Priesthood by simply abolishing it.

So much for my first "totally untrue statement.

I made one mistake in my last letter, which, however, rather strengthens than weakens my charge against the AngloContinental Society, as I shall presently show. I represented the grant which has been withdrawn from Prota as made by the Anglo-Continental Society. On reflection, however, I began to doubt the correctness of this, and I lost no time in obtaining from Naples the true account of the matter. I found that my misgivings were well-founded; and you, Mr. Editor, will bear me witness that I sent you a correction of my mistake four days before Mr. Meyrick's letter appeared; though, as you were pressed for space, you were obliged to postpone its insertion till this week. Of this mistake Mr. Meyrick has greedily availed himself, and by dexterously breaking it up into parts, has manufactured several mistakes out of one.

And now I will show Mr. Meyrick that his correction of my mistake makes his case even worse than I represented it.

The representative in Naples of a society of English Churchmen, including several dignitaries of the English Church-the Dean of Chester, I think, among them-found it necessary, for the fair fame of the Church of England, to cut off all connection with Prota. He sent an account of the whole matter home to the Society in England, which, having examined into the facts, deliberately endorsed his decision. Mr. Meyrick then came forward, threw the aegis of the Anglo-Continental Society over the character of Prota, set at defiance the remonstrance of all the Churchmen at Naples, who were living on the spot and had an intimate acquaintance with all the circumstances, and still persists in subsidising Prota and his crew, and belauding them in the Reports of the Anglo-Continental Society. In other words, Mr. Meyrick went out of his way to commit, as far as he could, the Church of England to the doings of a man whose only recommendation is that he is a clever and unscrupulous controversialist. The letter which you have just published from the British Chaplain at Naples shows how much credit is due to the infamous fabrications of Signor Prota. It also gives your readers an opportunity of judging who is more open to the taunt of acting in a "hasty way," and "asserting as facts things that he cannot know "-Mr. Meyrick or I. I am sorry to see that Mr. Meyrick, in spite of all he knows, does not scruple to tout for subscribers to Prota's paper.

Mr. Meyrick says "the British Chaplain at Naples is not and never has been a friend of the Anglo-Continental Society." The British Chaplain and I do not agree on all

points, and among the points on which we differ might probably be included the best mode of helping on a reformation in Italy. But he is an earnest Churchman, anxious to promote a reformation in Italy, jealous for the honour of the Church of England, and intimately acquainted with the ways and doings of the so-called reforming Priests at Naples. He wishes well to the cause which the Anglo-Continental Society professes to aid; but he loves the Church of England too well to have anything to do with a Society which is making the Church of England a proverb of derision among thoughtful Italians.

Mr. Meyrick's laboured witticism on a misprint in my letter is sufficiently answered by the note which you were so good as to append to the letter.

"Prota," says Mr. Meyrick, "is not, and never has been, personally in the pay of the Anglo-Continental Society.''

6

Mr. Meyrick must excuse me for saying that he is taking refuge in a quibble. The money is given to Prota as a subsidy to the Emancipatore Cattolico. But Prota is the editor and proprietor of the Emancipatore Cattolico, and therefore the money is given to him; and, in matter of fact, he disposes of it as he pleases.

I have a good deal more to say on this subject, but I shall reserve it for another letter. Meanwhile let me beg Mr. Meyrick to keep to the points at issue between us. They are these:

1. English Churchmen at Naples, including the British Chaplain, after a careful investigation of facts, stopped a grant which they had made to the staff of the Emancipatore Cattolico; and one of the reasons of their so acting was the discovery that Prota had misappropriated part of the grant to his own personal use. Prota admitted this misappropriation in a letter which I saw.

2. Prota was employed by the Government to distribute some funds, and he lost that appointment.

3. Prota and his editorial staff had free quarters, by the favour of the Syndicate of Naples, in the Convent S. Domenico Maggiore. Here Prota was for some time in the habit of giving devotional tea-parties to the friends of Reformation in Italy. The company were attended to by a female in a Garibaldian jacket. Some of the visitors expressed their surprise at the apparition of a resident female among a band of reforming monks. But Prota assured them that the Garibaldina was the wife of the convent porter, and a most excellent woman. Some time after this, however, a street fracas took place, of which this most excellent woman was the heroine, and she had to appear before the police-court, when it turned out that she was not, and never had been, the wife of the convent porter.