And it is this feeling, propelled and invigorated by the successful issue of the Glasgow banquet, that will exert a powerful influence in "widening the foundations on which the defence of the British constitution and the religious establishments must rest" that, let a dissolution of Parliament come when it may, will wrest the

supremacy in one House from the hands of the Popish faction and their infidel and Radical allies, and secure to the other the uncontrolled exercise of their independence and that will ultimately save Britain, by strengthening through future ages the only bulwarks of her power-the limited monarchy, and the Protestant Church.

Ir has been repeated of late years by a certain party of our liberals, usque ad nauseam, that the papal authority, whatever it may have been in times past, has become an authority exclusively spiritual; that it assumes not to dictate political opinions to its adherents, or in any way to bias their convictions on matters purely civil and temporal. Roman Catholics among us have been zealous to refute the imputation of any jurisdiction other than religious being exercised by their Church; and the very first man of all our Radicals, the late Mr Cobbett, has written a history of the Reformation for the express purpose of showing what superior advantages, in many respects, Englishmen enjoyed whilst the papal supremacy extended over the country. In fact, there is a returning kindness felt very widely among us towards the Romish superstition. Its comparative powerlessness during a long lapse of time looks, to the unreflecting, very like harmlessness and innocence; and the reiterated asseverations one constantly hears of the perfect consistency of the doctrine and views of the Church of Rome with the largest measure of civil freedom, have not failed to make very deluding impressions. We should therefore omit to perform our duty if we did not show, from the volume whose title is prefixed to this article, that all these assertions and representations are false. One would think, indeed, that history would suffice to confute falsehoods so gross and palpable as those to which we allude. But since the uniform testimony of ages has been shoved aside as inapplicable to the actual character of the papal power, it is certainly not superfluous to produce a recent and striking exemplification of this character, which is as broad and complete as could possibly be desired.

Our readers may recollect that M. de la Menais, who has lately become so infamous by his book entitled “ Paroles d'un Croyant," was some years ago the editor and originator of a paper called the “ Avenir." The object of this publication was to ally the Roman Catholic religion with the democratic movement wherever it might appear. This idea was bold, and seemed ingenious, but betrayed a depth of incredulity with respect to the Divine origin of a religion which was in this manner to be revived. Those, however, who had no purposes of private ambition to serve, saw at once that the, project would infallibly destroy the power to which it professed to impart new life. A certain spirit of free enquiry was necessarily presupposed in the hazardous experiment, and it was palpable, if Rome put herself in the van of such a spirit, that, from the moment in which she did so, her own foundations would be plucked up, and her complete overthrow would become inevitable. It was therefore intimated to the Abbé de la Menais, that however pure his intentions might be, his Holiness was greatly displeased with his speculations, and that if they were not discontinued, they would be con. demned by authority. In consequence of this intimation, the Avenir was provisionally suspended. But the Abbé being unwilling to renounce his own views, determined to make an effort to bring the Pope and Cardinals to embrace them. For this purpose he set out with his two chief colleagues, Messieurs de la Cordaire and Montalembert, on a visit of expostulation to the Papal See.

"On this mission," says he, "three obscure Christians, true representatives of another age, by the naïve simplicity of their faith, to which was united perhaps some knowledge of the actual world, proceeded towards the Eternal

City. Being arrived, however, these sweetly simple and intelligent children of the Church obtained no satisfaction. After an interview with the Holy Father, in which it was stipulated that the matter which had brought the pilgrims so far should not even be alluded to, M. de la Menais received a letter from the Cardinal Pacca, condemning dogmatically all his political views. The following is an extract from this letter. Its sentiments are declared by the Cardinal to proceed from the infallible mouth of the successor of St Peter.' They are therefore not to be regarded as private opinions, but as the decisions of the Roman Church, and as such they have been received and obeyed.

"As you love," say the Cardinal in this epistle, "the truth, and desire to know it that you may follow it, I will tell you frankly, and in a few words, the principal points, which, on an examination of the Avenir, have displeased his Holiness. First, he has been greatly afflicted to per

ceive that the editors of that paper have

taken on themselves to discuss in the presence of the public, and to decide on the most delicate questions touching the government of the Church and its supreme chief. The Holy Father also disapproves, and even reprobates the doctrine relative to civil (underlined in the original) and political liberty. The doctrines of the Avenir on liberty of worship, and liberty of the press (also underlined in the original), which have been treated with so much exaggeration, and pushed so far by its editors, are likewise very reprehensible, and in opposition to the instruction, the maxims, and the practice of the Church. They have greatly astonished and afflicted the Holy Father; for, if under certain circumstances, prudence requires they should be tolerated as a lesser evil, such doctrines can never be upheld by any Catholic, as either good or desirable."

In compliance with this decision of the Holy Father, the Avenir was finally discontinued, and a formal declaration was made by the editors, that its discontinuance was an act of obedience and submission to the authority of the Pope. This submission could not, one would think, have failed to be completely satisfactory. But it was not deemed so. The papal dignitaries, conceiving that the Abbé still retained some stubborn notions of a political nature, not derived absolutely from the dictation of the Roman Sec, required of him to follow up his

first step towards obedience, by declaring his interior, simple, absolute, and unlimited adhesion to the sentiments expressed in a late encyclical letter of his Holiness to the general Church. Now, this letter, among other dogmatic dicta of the same complexion, declares "the liberty of the press to be a fatal liberty, which cannot be held in too much abhorrence," and that "the maxim, or rather DELIRIUM, which affirms that liberty of conscience ought to be guaranteed, is false and absurd." Beside this, the infallible epistle inculcates, with great earnestness, a blind submission to all the acts of established power, and marks with its reprobation every novelty. The Abbé de la Menais no doubt perceived that formally to subscribe to the truth of these doctrines would be tantamount to bidding for ever adieu to his own trade of politico-religious demagogue, or would plunge him into many dishonourable inconsistencies. He therefore demurred, and found himself in a position extremely puzzling. He attempted to make a distinction between the temporal and spiritual power of the Popedom, but only got more and more involved in embarrassing questioning.

We will give some of his contradictory reasonings on this subject, though not absolutely needful to our argument. They are strongly illustrative, we think, both of the equivocating dishonesty of the individual, and of the intellectual misery which even a highly accomplished mind is reduced to whilst in bondage to Rome. The Abbé, in the sentence preceding the passage which follows, has declared his opinion, that civil and political matters do not belong to the jurisdiction of the Church; but frightened, it appears, at his own temerity in this assertion, he veers suddenly about, and says-" But if either by right or in fact the Pope decides otherwise, it is evidently the duty of Catholics rigorously to submit to his decisions, provisionally, at least, and even definitively, if the Episcopacy remain silent; for, according to the maxims of the Gallican Church, the tacit adhesion of the general Church suffices to stamp the pontifical decision with the seal of infallibility." The Abbé then, again taking courage after this admission, ventures to reason with the Papal power about liberty of conscience, and says boldly" Supposing it admitted

that Catholicism should be in contradiction with the human conscience, under what obligation would men be to embrace its decisions? On the one side, it would be said, it is pride and madness to confide in reason naturally infirm'" (this is from the Pope's let ter); " and on the other, that the conscience itself is deceitful; so that, to be a Catholic, one must abjure at the same time one's reason and one's conscience." After this sally, the Abbé becomes again submissive :-" For the sake of peace," says he, "I determined to sign the declaration demanded of me, but under the express reservation of my duty towards my country and humanity. This reservation, the next sentence informs us, was a flagrantly dishonest act of prevarication; for, he continues, "in signing this declaration, simply, absolutely, and without limitation, I knew very well that I affirmed implicitly that the Pope is God; and with the like object in view, I am ready to affirm the same explicitly, whenever it shall be required of me."

It is needless to make any comment on this brief exposition we have been able to furnish of the actual political principles of the Church of Rome. The doctrines of civil liberty, of the liberty of the press, and of liberty of worship, are all, we see, equally denounced by the "infallible" vicar of Christ. They can never be represented, says the successor of St Peter, by any true Catholic as either good or desirable, but are to be reprobated, held in abhorrence, deemed false and absurd, and considered as the result of absolute delirium. After this, is there not something striking in the fact, that the most bigoted Papists among us are the most outrageous asserters of all these kinds of liberty? Are we then really to believe such persons frank and honest in their declamations on these subjects, or are we to conclude, that a desire to reach a certain position of influence falsifies their tongues, and brings their professions into contradiction with their convictions? Or do they consider it just and honourable to deceive enemies with a show of false colours? God forbid that we should make a bugbear of these men; but let us not deceive ourselves with respect to their character, or rather not to do them injustice-let us not deceive ourselves with respect to the

character of that Power which overshadows them, which is greater than they are. The Papist will always predominate over the man, however upright his natural disposition may be, when the interests of his Church are in question.

We must now turn to some other parts of M. de La Menais's volume, which demand a comment or two. There is a school of philosophers and politicians, so called in France, who may be appropriately denominated the Mystics, and of these our author is one of the most distinguished examples. The French Mystics correspond in one particular to our Utilitarians; that is, they are in the advance of the Movement party of their countrymen. Indeed, it is difficult to find a French democrat who has not a strain of mysticism in his views. The party, however, to whom we at present more especially allude, have no further resemblance to our Benthamites than what we have just pointed out. The two schools, Mystic and Utilitarian, merely occupy the same places in their several countries. In every other respect, they form perfect contrasts to each other, and show strikingly how the nations in which they have sprung up essentially differ in character. Our Radicals of "the greatest happiness principle," for instance, look to Reform, which, according to their designs, is to proceed without stoppage, from detail to detail, till all things are newly modified, as their grand instrument.

The French visionaries, on the contrary, regarding Reform (indeed, the word is not in the political vocabulary of the country) as too slow, and not sufficiently regenerating, look to revolution. But their desire for revolution arises not principally out of a love of change, or of excitement, or out of ambition, or any of the other motives which usually urge men to subvert existing establishments. The passion which chiefly actuates them is much more potent, and altogether of a different description. The men we are writing of are fanatics. They anticipate, as far as we can catch their meaning, that, through a long chain of revolutionary convulsions, a certain social Revelation is to be wrought out, which is to consummate the happiness of the human race. Compared with this passionate dream, the wildest projects and fancies of our English de

structives are sobriety itself. But it may be generally observed, that Frenchmen, when they are not in the opposite extreme, mere selfish materialists, are almost always chasing a phantom in the clouds. Politics, to their mercurial and refining intellects, becomes quite a metaphysical subject, and so sublimated are their hopes and apprehensions of things to come, that the horizon before them looks to us very like the natural horizon ::-a mingling, to all appearance, of heaven and earth. We cannot help attributing the peculiarity of mental character thus displayed to a strong native sentiment of religion operating on infidelity. We will endeavour to explain this thought more distinctly.

Every one must have noticed, that a certain class of French revolutionists never appear anxious to realize any present good; their aim seems always to be to reach some distant future, and the intermediate stage between this present and future are contemplated by them with impatience, as in no measure satisfying their wants. A perfectly new organization of society is the goal of all their efforts, and till this is attained, they resolve themselves into a state of permanent rebellion against every thing which has a show of stability. Now we are strongly persuaded that this strained projection of the mind into a state of things which can have no proximate accomplishment, is a kind of substitute for religion. It is not the result of a superabundance of activity and enterprise, for these qualities always fasten upon objects which are near at hand to be realized. But it arises from a craving necessity to fill up the void which infidelity leaves in the heart. For, although unbelief may blot out a creed, it cannot blot out of human nature that property of which a creed of some kind or another is an

essential counterpart. Frenchmen, however, when they rejected Christianity, rejected at the same time all fabled and philosophic prospects of an hereafter. The latter could not possibly succeed to, though they might and did precede the former. In the tormenting state, then, that ensued of spiritual desires without spiritual objects, they shaped to their imaginations a certain transcendental condition of society, which was and is to them in place of a gospel and a worship. This fancied acme of civilisation corresponds to the religious idea of a millennium, and although the expectation of its advent, through successive revolutions, is too remote and indistinct a sentiment to be broadly avowed, yet is it vaguely entertained, and constitutes the secret fire actuating, and, seemingly to those who feel it, sanctifying the grosser motives which impel them for ever onwards. We have no doubt but that Robespierre, Marat, and the whole array of abhorred monsters, who astonished the world with their crimes in the first Revolution, acted under the spur of this illusion. They had, all of them, it is highly probable, a distant vision of pure and perfect glory before them, to realize which, even to far off generations, no sacrifice was deemed too great.

We can conceive nothing which tends to confusion--to chaos we might almost say-so directly as this habit of pointing all those hopes and aspirations, which belong properly to a future state, towards speculations as to what mankind may attain to on the earth. But when a future state is rendered by incredulity a wide blank, there is nothing strange in men practising this gross delusion on themselves. Unbelievers of ardent and imaginative temperaments are very apt to fall into this fanatic trance. Believers also in a superstitious creed

are naturally prone to mysticism. Yet we do not think the latter, when honestly devout, are possessed of the spirit we have above described, except perhaps by infection from a surrounding society. M. de Chateaubriand, from whose book on English literature we are now about to present an extract, quoted by M. de la Menais in support of his own views, is evidently one of the infected. As to the Abbé himself, we look upon him as a deci, ded infidel, and would much rather associate his name with that of M. Lerminier, or any other of the fevered visionists who abound in France, than with that of the celebrated man we have just named, and whom we are grieved to find in such company. The extract is as follows:

"Society, such as it is at present, will cease to exist. In proportion as instruc

tion descends to the inferior classes, the secret ulcer, which has corroded social order from the beginning of the world, and which is the cause of all popular disquietudes and agitations, will be discovered. The exaggerated inequality of conditions and fortunes which prevails might well be maintained, whilst, on the one side, it was hidden by ignorance, and, on the other, by a factitious civil organization; but, as far as this inequality is generally perceived, it will receive its mortal wound.

"Re-establish, if you can, the aristocratic fictions of past times; try to persuade the poor man who knows how to read the poor man to whom knowledge is daily communicated by the press, from city to city, and from village to villagetry to persuade such an one, so instructed, having the same enlightenment and intelligence as yourself, that he should submit to every privation, whilst his neighbour possesses, without labour, a thousand times more than the superfluities of life, and your attempt will be vain. Demand not of the multitude efforts above nature.

"The material developement of society will hasten the developement of intellect. When the powers of steam shall be put perfectly into operation; when, combined with the telegraph and railroads, it shall, so to speak, annihilate distance, it will not only be objects of traffic, which will travel with the speed of light from one end of the globe to the other, but ideas also. When fiscal and commercial barriers between different states shall be abolished, as they are now between the different provinces of the same state; when wages, which are only a prolonged slavery, shall be scored out by means of an equality established between the producer and con

"A future is before us-a future,

powerful and free, in all the plenitude of evangelic equality-but it is yet distant distant beyond the most extended visible horizon. It can be reached only by indefatigable hope, incorruptible by adversity, and whose wings wax strong and widen under all the eclipses of disappointment."

We believe this passage fully justifies the observations which precede it. The views it holds forth are wide and vague to the utmost. A subversion. of society from all its foundations is prophesied, and the passions which are to bring this about are described as holy impulses towards a state of evangelic equality. A revolution, total and complete, of social order, as it has existed from the beginning of the world the consummation probably of several successive revolutions--is foreseen. The poor are no longer to endure the existence of the rich, wages are to be abolished as slavery, and all nations abandoning national enmities, are to have but one character and one common interest. Perfectly understanding each other, they are again to build up a tower which is to reach to the sky. An infidel design this was at first, and the same it is now. Mean time troubles and convulsions in procinct and in seed, are seen and hailed with 66 indefatigable hope." But the grand result is distant, "far distant beyond the most extended visible horizon."

It would be idle to expose in detail the fanaticism, absurdity, and iniquity of this visionary prospect. We should have hoped of M. de Chateaubriand

that he would have been the foremost to lift up the warning voice, to set up a beacon to his contemporaries and to posterity, that the rocks and quicksands before them might be seen, and avoided by every strenuous effort of virtue and of courage; but instead of this he cheers them on their desperate