trary, that the holy priests, whose piety at Mass has melted the soul into tears of tenderness or raised it into ecstatic raptures, have been remarkable for their minute observance of the very slightest rubrics; and that only those ministers of God who are unworthy of the name,—those whose faith has grown dull, whose lives are sensual and worldly,-those only find the ceremonial of the Church an intolerable yoke that they are anxious to throw off.

2. The second objection brought by the Anglican Reformers was that much of the symbolism of the Catholic Church is so obscure that it requires quite a technical education to find out its meaning.

Let me take note of this objection before I reply to it; for it contains a peremptory refutation of another objection more common, though less specious. It is commonly asserted that the worship of the Catholic Church is theatrical. If by this it was merely meant that it has a scenic or representative character, I would willingly admit the word. But when it is meant that the Church uses a display intended to attract and captivate the idle and curious gaze, the word is singularly inappropriate. The truth is, that the idle and curious gazers are always offended by her ceremonies, because they cannot comprehend them, and they have little charm for the mere eyes and ears. So many ceremonies have a spiritual and hidden meaning, so many prayers contain deep and mystic allusions, which can only be perceived and understood by those who are instructed and attentive. The ceremonies of Holy Week, for example, possess little attraction to the curious Protestant or the worldly Catholic; but they are full of inexhaustible charm to the devout worshipper, who has taken pains to ascertain their meaning and meditate attentively on the events they recall and the allusions they contain.

Yet, if some of the Church's rites are obscure, it is not after the fashion of certain 'initiations,' the obscurity of which is their only value; nor are they like Egyptian hieroglyphics, whose secret was known only to the sacerdotal race; nor are they rites like those, the pattern of which was shown to Moses on the Mount, intended to conceal rather than explain truths,

for the utterance of which the time was not yet come. They are like the parables of Jesus Christ, by the very texture of the veil provoking a holy curiosity to look beneath it; they are the mirror in which we see now enigmatically what as yet we cannot gaze on face to face.

It is quite true that the stranger to our faith, who comes amongst us to pry, perchance to mock, will go away filled with scorn, for our ceremonies are a cloud of darkness to the Egyptians, while they are a light by night to the Israelites. But it is in great measure to the emblematic and profound nature of the Church's rites that is due the singular fact that, while to witness them but once is tedious to the incredulous or the worldly, their constant recurrence never wearies the devout. Each year, as the same festivals revolve, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear discover new depths, new beauties, new harmonies, new lights, new joys and consolations. Is it not right it should be so? Is there to be no reward for the diligence, the attention, and the perseverance of the devout? Or are we to be blamed because some rites are calculated to impress the senses, and so to enlighten the minds of the ignorant and arouse the careless from their torpor, and then censured anew because there are rites which suit only the learned and the spiritual? Must not the Church care for all her children? Taught by the same Holy Spirit who inspired the Scriptures, she has composed her Ritual on the same plan. 'In Holy Scripture,' says St. Augustine, 'there are many things plain, by which God feeds the soul even of the simple. There are other things obscure. The very obscurity of these provokes curiosity and prevents satiety: there is a pleasant labour in seeking the hidden truth, and when it is discovered it is enjoyed in proportion to the labour of its acquisition. And thus a novelty is given even to what was old, by the newness of the form that envelops it. Quid est hoc, rogamus vos, fratres, unde dulciora quo obscuriora? Conficit nobis potionem ad amorem suum quibusdam miris modis.'6

And on what plan but this was God's own Ritual composed? Look again to Calvary. The darkness, the earthquake, the 6 St. August., Enar. in Ps. 138.

loud voice, were signs which even the simplest could understand; and they struck their breasts with compunction for the crime, and they felt there was a mystery, though they knew not well its nature. But there were other words and signs the people could not read. Why was the veil of the Temple rent? Why were the graves opened? Why was no bone broken? Why did blood and water flow from the pierced side? What was the meaning of the agonising cry, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?' Why were those words quoted from a psalm? What relation had that psalm to Him who used it? Why did He speak these words in the Hebrew tongue? These are questions which the people could not have answered. Perhaps Mary alone, of all the witnesses, knew the full meaning of all the circumstances of the Passion. But they are mysteries which invite us to reflection; and he who seeks gains more profit from his search than if all things had been laid bare to him at first.

SECTION V. ON THE USE OF DEAD LANGUAGES.

IN treating of the charge of obscurity made against Catholic Ritual, I ought perhaps to notice the use of dead languages, and the objections so often derived against it from St. Paul's regulations concerning the gift of tongues (1 Cor. xiv.). There are few passages of Scripture more difficult to understand thoroughly; yet when the history and the theory of Catholic usage are known it will be apparent that it falls under no apostolic

censure.

I. Discipline past and present.

Several languages are in actual use in Catholic Liturgy; in the East, principally Greek and Chaldaic; Latin universally in the West. No intrinsic sacredness is attributed to a language.

Most, if not all, of these languages have ceased to be vernacular in the countries where they are used; but they were living languages when first employed.

It cannot be argued from this that what many authors say about the advantage of a dead language in concealing sacred

mysteries from the profane and ignorant, according to our Lord's words, 'Cast not your pearls before swine,' is an innovation on primitive discipline; since, while the vernacular was used, the Discipline of the Secret prevailed, by which only the well-initiated were admitted to the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice.

It is acknowledged that this is a matter of discipline which may vary with circumstances. Thus Pope John VIII. (A.D. 880), at the prayer of St. Methodius, granted the use of the vernacular in Holy Mass to the newly-converted Sclavonians. One reason for this concession was, that it was difficult to find priests of that nation who possessed a sufficient acquaintance with Latin. Hence, two centuries later, when circumstances were changed, St. Gregory VII. recalled the permission.

When the question of language was brought before the Council of Trent, it was decided that it was not expedient to grant permission to celebrate everywhere in the vernacular tongue.

That there is no contradiction whatever between these decrees, but only a variation of discipline in accordance with circumstances, may be seen by comparing them.

John VIII. wrote to Count Swentopulch, Prince of the Moravians, as follows: The authority of Scripture teaches us to praise God, not only in the three tongues' (in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin), 'but in every language: "O praise the Lord, all ye nations; praise Him, all ye peoples" (Ps.). The Apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost, published in every tongue the wonders of God; and St. Paul, that heavenly trumpet, teaches us this, when he says "that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father" (Phil. ii.). The same Apostle speaks fully and clearly on the subject in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, where he teaches us to edify the Church by the use of different languages. Assuredly there is nothing contrary to the principles of our holy faith to sing Mass in the Sclavonian tongue, to read the Gospel in it, and the lessons of the Old and New Testaments, if well translated and explained, or to sing the other parts of the Divine Office.'

This was written in the ninth century. I subjoin the decree of the Council of Trent in the sixteenth :

'Although the Mass contains great instruction for the faithful people, nevertheless it has not seemed expedient to the Fathers that it should be everywhere (passim) celebrated in the vulgar tongue. Wherefore the ancient usage of each Church, and the rite approved of by the Holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all Churches, being in each place retained; that the sheep of Christ may not suffer hunger, nor the little ones ask for bread and there be none to break it unto them, the Holy Synod charges pastors and all who have the cure of souls, that they frequently, during the celebration of Mass, expound, either by themselves or others, some portion of those things which are read at Mass, and that, amongst the rest, they explain some mystery of this most holy Sacrifice, especially on the Lord's days and festivals' (session 22, ch. viii.). That my reader may understand the reasons on which this discipline of the Church is based, and may be able to judge whether or not it is in harmony with the doctrine of St. Paul, it will be necessary that he should first have a true conception of the Catholic theory of worship, and next that he should take an historical and philosophical view of the nature and variations of human speech.

II. Catholic theory of worship and of prayer.

The main difficulty experienced by Protestants in witnessing Catholic worship arises from their not understanding the difference between a common act and a common prayer. The acts of the Church, such as processions, expositions of the Blessed Sacrament, the administration of Sacraments, and above all the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, are indeed always accompanied by prayer, and generally by prayers of priest and people, though not necessarily by united or common prayer. In any case, the act must be distinguished from the prayers.

A Protestant may easily understand what is meant by this distinction by aid of a few illustrations :

Suppose a ship, filled with a mixed crew of French, Spanish, and Portuguese, is being wrecked on the coast of England. A crowd is assembled on the cliff, watching with intense ear