See, we need an appeal to be made to the noblest and most loyal sentiments of Catholics by the Holy See. So long as the Holy See confines itself to declaring general principles as to mortal sin in the matter of mixed education, so long will Catholics examine and determine the question on that ground alone. But if the Holy See would lift the whole question into a higher region and appeal to the highest motives, and invite the co-operation of all to make generous sacrifices on behalf of the Catholicity of the future, a response would be given by many to such an appeal. Let the Holy See point out that the Church must look to the future, and that the future of Catholic education ought not to be jeopardised by selfishness or want of generosity and self-denial in the present. These are motives which will not fail to strengthen the public policy of Catholics in a determination to have nothing to do with the Universities. Once more I implore of your Eminence to take up the cause before it becomes difficult or hopeless, and to give us a full and ample instruction, so that we may not only hold in horror the mixed education, which is so great an evil, but that we may determine to develop Catholic Philosophy and prepare the minds of the Catholic educated classes to resist the increasing rationalism and infidelity which is now penetrating everywhere. I beg your Eminence to pardon the freedom of my speech while I assure you that I submit in all things to the judgment and direction of the Holy See."

Finally, to show what it was exactly which Cardinal Vaughan had in mind when he spoke of the intellectual atmosphere of the Universities as likely to be dangerous to the faith of young Catholics, the following letter from a

Catholic undergraduate may be quoted because I know it made a great impression on him at the time :—

"You have no idea how irreligious the atmosphere, especially the intellectual atmosphere, is here at Oxford. And it is not that men scoff or sneer at religion. What strikes me is the number of men, both professors and undergraduates, who simply discard the supernatural in religion altogether, who believe in nothing but what is material, and believe in no one but themselves. There are others, on the other hand, who are too afraid to declare that they have no religion, but who look upon religion as being simply a social conventionality, by the non-observance of which you scandalise your neighbour. Never was this better illustrated than last night at the Union. The proposition before the meeting was 'that the meeting does not consider there is sufficient evidence for disbelieving in the phenomena known as Ghosts.' The supporters held the theory that most ghost stories were true, but were due to natural causes not yet discovered. The opponents held that no natural causes could be attributed to them, and therefore they could have no existence. But you will say that the question of belief in ghosts is not a very serious matter. Just so, I reply. And if the matter had ended there it might have been merely amusing. But it was discussed on the basis of the unbelieving spirit of the age and led on to a discussion as to the existence of any supernatural agency. And though according to the rules of the Society theological discussion is not allowed, an exceedingly thin veil was thrown over the arguments, and many of the speeches rejected everything supernatural. One thus got an opportunity of seeing what the general tone of the more cultivated section of Oxford was, and my opinion is undoubtedly that it is absolutely irreligious. For a certain amount of irreligion, nay, for a large amount of it, I was fully prepared, but the reality has far surpassed my expectations. The danger to us does not lie in constantly hearing open declarations of agnosticism, for the attitude of the agnostic is repugnant from its very presumptuousness, but in the constant and most insidious assumptions made by all around that there is no supernatural, that therefore

there is no need of religion, and that the world is a perfectible organism. You will see how all this aims at the very root of our fundamental doctrines; but you will see how we must be safe if only we keep our eyes open. Forewarned

is forearmed."

He had other letters to the same effect.

And yet it would be true to say that when Cardinal Vaughan came to face the problem as Metropolitan he approached it without prejudice. No man was ever less hampered by his own past. He had given himself so utterly to the cause he served that there was no room for such poor irrelevancies as questions of personal consistency. What was best for the spiritual welfare of these youths? Nothing else mattered, and least of all whether this or that party could claim a victory, or this or that prelate must confess that for a quarter of a century he had been fighting the inevitable and committing the Church in England to a policy that was as short-sighted as it was futile. But though he was now to advocate what he had formerly opposed, the master motive was the same.

When the question first came to the front in the late 'sixties, the arguments used on either side were not only opposed to each other, but were on a different plane. The advantages of a university career were at least not primarily religious, while the dangers apprehended were concerned wholly with either faith or morals. It would not be fair to say that worldly advantages were being balanced against spiritual perils, but certainly the main motive of those who urged the change was to secure for Catholics the widest opportunities of achieving successful careers, while those who resisted did so because they believed the common life of the Universities might lead

to some weakening of Catholic faith. To Herbert Vaughan, who cared supremely for the one set of considerations and hardly at all for the other, who all his life thought success in this world was good or evil solely in relation to the next, the question was not an open one, or, rather, for him there was no question at all. His side was taken at once; the mere presentment of the case ranged him in opposition.

Perhaps it will help to make the Cardinal's view clearer if we take as a concrete instance his advice in the case of his own nephew:

"Oct., 1891.

"My DEAR CHARLES,-If there were no future state, and if Catholics in your position had no mission as Catholics to the English people, I would say go to Oxford or Cambridge-whichever you like. You may learn a little there, and you will make acquaintances and get into the ways of the world. And it won't make much matter what happens so long as you are happy and don't disgrace yourself. But we believe in a future state, and I believe in Catholics having a mission to the English people. Your influence will depend not upon your being like and equal to the mass of Englishmen, but upon your being of a higher type and superior to them, specially in intellectual grasp and in an intelligent possession of philosophical and Catholic truth. Oxford and Cambridge can only give you what they have. They have a false philosophy so far as they have any; and they are essentially in mind, heart, and influence alien to the Catholic standards of thought and aspiration. You cannot impress upon yourself too thoroughly the thought

that you are now arrived at the time when you are really beginning the most important period of your education. Your faculties have been trained and prepared for what ought now to begin, viz., a thorough Catholic intellectual training in the science which will give you a command and a sure footing over the whole region of moral and philosophical thought. As to your view that you can get 'practical philosophy by mixing up with men in real life,' that simply means that if you stick tight to the Catechism, you will get through life as a Catholic and save your soul. But this also means that you must have nothing to do with the great world of thought and speculation which is entering like an atmosphere into the lives of men. It means that instead of taking up a position of strength and influence and rendering valuable service to God, you are willing to take a back seat and to bury your talent. It means that you are willing to forfeit a grand opportunity to prepare yourself to do all that you can for God's honour and glory, in order that you may gain what? in return for this forfeiture? Yes, ask yourself what? This is a matter that you should earnestly and humbly pray for light upon. Commend yourself to the Sedes Sapientiae, who will never fail you if you never leave the steps of her throne until she has led you to Her Son.

"Believe me,

"Your devoted uncle,

"H., BP. SALFORD.

"PS.-Think of this as a recipe to make a loyal, leading, powerful Catholic: 'Send him in the most critical period of life to a Protestant University, plunge him into an atmosphere of worldliness, prevent his having a sound