A SAINT! He did not retire into trackless deserts like the eremites' of old, but like a retiring beauty, suffered his flight from the world to be seen, and was shocked when he was followed. Whilst rendering himself an object of loathing and disgust, and attenuating his body to the proper point of sanctity, it was swelling with holy pride and inward gratulation; but as soon as this part of his object was once accomplished, he threw off his tattered robes, and iron chain, he diminished his hours of prayer, and grander prospects and mightier power began to open before him. Not that he would have hesitated to continue them for the purpose of preserving his reputation or securing an important object; but what is to be remarked, is, that those things which he had formerly considered indispensable, were now no longer thought so, and that without any change of the circumstances which originally made them necessary, and it is not sufficient to resort to visions to account for the change. For, although an enthusiastic imagination might see such things in dim perspective,' the whole of the conduct of Ignatius marks him to be a cool persevering and calculating politician', and the visions themselves ceased, when

1 Though his biographers considered him of an ardent temperament, his physicians thought him of a phlegmatic constitution.

no longer required to spread his name and consolidate his power. Though influenced by motives of ambition, they were not those of wealth or rank, but of real, substantial power; and, although some obscure thoughts of framing a religious Order might have obtruded upon his meditations at Manreza, ít is probable that the precise nature of it was only gradually unfolded, and not completed until he was about to leave Paris *."

The latter part of the life of Ignatius Loyola, bears no proportion to its outset. Enthusiasm had abated, and policy was the cynosure of his subsequent career. In this he differs from Alexius; as he became more active, he became less a SAINT; and as his mind opened, and reason assumed her proper station, he gradually lost the fanatic in the designing founder of a sect. What he retained of fanaticism was chiefly external, and artificial; but the leading features of his life, accord surprizingly with the legendary character of the text. Had Loyola remained always ignorant, he had been always a bigot; and, judging by the commencement of his life, * RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW, No. XVII.

would have died as useless and as burdensome to society as the son of the senator Eufemian.

NOTE 13. Page 80.

"What I expended, I have; what I gave away, I have."

From hence, in all probability, Robert Byrkes derived the quaint epitaph, which is to be found, according to Gough, in Doncaster church, "new cut" upon his tomb in Roman capitals.

"Howe Howe: who is heare :

I, Robin of Doncaster, and Margeret my feare 1.
That I spent, that I had:

The story seems here to be defective; "what I expended, I have: what I gave away, I have," re

1 Wife-properly companion, comrade.

ceives no explanation. It may be filled up thus: "What I expended, I have," that is, having expended my property with judgment, I have received various benefits which remain to me in my posterity. "What I gave away, I have," that is, my donations have procured for me the thanks of the poor, and the blessing of heaven.

NOTE 15. Page 86.

"Must and vinegar."

Must, is new wine. "Vinum igitur mustum, quomodo Cato loquitur, idem est, quod novum, sive oivos pooxidios. Nonius: Mustum, non solum vinum, verum novellum quicquid est, rectè dicitur."

Vinegar, Lat. acetum. "Optimum, et laudatissimum acetum a Romanis habebatur Egyptum, quod acrimoniam quidem habebat multam, sed mixtam tamen dulcedine aliqua, quæ asperitatem tollerit, nec horrorem gustandi injiceret." Facciol. The vinegar spoken of in the text, was probably sweetened.

NOTE 16. Page 90.

There are several popular stories not unlike the

present; but they will probably occur to the memory of most readers.

NOTE 17. Page 92.

There is a curious defence of transubstantiation in this moral; and we may admire its ingenuity while we reprobate the absurd doctrine it is designed to advocate.

"You ask," says the writer of the GEST, "by what means bread may be converted into the real body of Christ. Observe how the mother nourishes her child. If she hunger, and want milk, the infant, deprived of its proper sustenance, languishes and dies. But if, in her greatest extremity, she drink but the lees of wine, those lees, taken by the mouth, become changed into blood, and supply milk and nutriment to the child. If nature, then, exert so much power over the woman, how much more shall the virtue of the sacramental rite, operating by the mouth of the priest, (that is, by the words of Christ proceeding from his mouth), convert bread into flesh, and wine into blood."