'a e. % <>^ :# ^^ 7 /^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1^ I.I ilM IIIM (40 M ||Z2 120 !.8 Photographic Sciences Corporation 1.25 1.4 1.6 ■^ 6" - ► ^ N? ,\ «- :\ \ ^9) V 6^ %^ -%^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14S80 (716) 872-4503 W CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Q>\ Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter iny of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilme te meilleur axemplaire qu'il lui a ete possible de se procurer. Les details de cat exemplaire qui sont peut-^tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui pe'tvent modifier una image reproduite, ou qui peuveiit exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiquis ci-dessous. n n Coloured covers/ Couvertura da coulaur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculde □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en coulaur I — "2 Coloured ink (i.a. other than blue oi black)/ i\/ 1 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) D D n n n Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serree jeut causer de I'ombra ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these iijVB been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ^xh filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxe< Pages ddcolorees, tachet^es ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages d^tachees Showthrough/ Transparence r~~y Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~n Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ D D Qualite indgale de I impression Includi^s supplementary material/ Compirend du material supplementaire □ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed tJ ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellerrsnt obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc.. cnt 6t6 film^es ^ nouveau de 'aeon a obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filn^ au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X IT 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, McGill University, Montreal. The images appearjng here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keoping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire filmA fut reproduit grice A la g^n^rosit* de: DepartTient of Rare Books and Sp acial Collections, McGill University, Montreal. Lee images suivantes ont iti rsproduitss avec le plus grand soin. compte tsnu de la condition et de la nettet* de I'sxemplaire filmA, et an conformity avec lea conditions du contrat de flimage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol ▼ (meaning END"), whichever applies. Lea exemplaires originaux dont la couverture an papier est imprimte sont film^s en commenqant par le premier plat at en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'Impression ou d'lilustration, soit par le second plat, salon le eaa. Tous les autres axemplaires originaux sont filmto an commencant par ia premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'lilustration at en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un dea symboles suivants'apparaitra sur la demiAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le caa: le symboie — »> iiignifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Mapa, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratioa. Thoae too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand comer, left to right and top to bottom, aa many frames aa required. The following diag'vma iiluatrato the method: Lea cartea, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fiimte A des taux de rMuction diffirants. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour itre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film^ d partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche dt droite, et de haut en baa. en prnnant le nombre d'Images nteeesaira. Las diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithoda. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hjl MI^Jpvpp«M|[p *^ -**wi •w^ ;^ MARY The Mother of Christ IN Prophecy and its Fulfilment By R. F. QUIGLEY, Barrister-at-Law, SAINT JOHN, N. B. " I will put enmities between thee and the Woman, and thy seed and her seed; She {lie or It) shall crush thy head."'— Geuesis :}: 1'). "Behold a Virgin shall conceive, and hear a Son, and His name shall be called Emmanuel." — Imias 7: 14. and "The Angel Gabriel was sent from God . . to a Virgin . the name of the Virgin was Maiy.'"— iwA-e 1 : 20-27. "When the fidness of the time was come, God sent His Son, made of a Woman." — Galatlanis 4: 4. (Ahnighty God) "in all eternity, we both jbelieve, foreordained her who was to be Theotokos, Genitrix Dei, the Mother of God. He, in time, created her; He endoAved her with all those qualities, with which it was fitting that she should be endowed, in whom, ' when Thou tookest upon Thee to deliver man, Thou didst not abhor the Virgin's womb.' "It was indeed, hi my young days, a startling thought, when it first flashed upon me, that it nuist be true, that one, of our nature, whi<'h is the last and lowest of God's lational creation, was raised to a nearness to Almighty God, above all the choirs of Angels or Archangels, Dominions or Powers, above the Cherubhn, who seem so near to God, (U- the Seraphim with their burning love, close to His Throne. Yet it Avas self-evident, as soon as stated, that she, of whom He deigned to take His Human Flesh, was brought to a nearness to Himself above all created Ic mgs: that she stood single and alone, in all creation or all possible creations, in that, in her womb, He who, in his God- head, is Gonsubstautial with the Father, deigned, as to His Human Body, to become Consubstantial with her ... ^ i v •* "And, doubtless, any imaginations of ours nuist come short of the trixth, if we would picture to ourselvesthe supernuman, engraced beaaty (.f <:! e srul of! her whom God vouchsafed to create, so alone in His whole creation, whose being ever lay in His eternal Counsels, who nuist have been in His Divine Mind, when, in all t4ernitY, He contemplated the way in which lie should unite' His rational creation to Himself, redeeming our fallen ract-,; frora whom He who shoukl be God and Man, was to derive His Human Flesh, aivl in His Sacred Childhood to be subject to her."'— Rev. Dr. Pusey's First Letter to Cardinal Newman, Eirenicon, vol. 2, pp. 2:1-20. i> 2 PRESS NOTICES. The American Catholic Quarterly Remew. The origin of this large volume of 471 pages was as follows : In November, 1887, Bishop Kingdon delivered a lectur in Trinity Church School-house, St. John, New Brunswick, on " Misprints, in the course of which he Siiid, according to the Globe report :» Some- times the substitution of one letter for another made a vast difference, and as an illustration of this he referred to the words Ipsk and Ipsa, the latter word, in an important passage in the Douay Bible, being the foundation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception." Mr. Quigley, a barrister-at-law of St. John, was present at that lecture, and on the si)ot, immediately after the lecture, he ])rotested to the Secretary of the Lecture Committee against the incorrectness and unfairness of the Bishop's statement. He then wrote to the Globe newspaper a long letter, declaring that statement incorrect and baseless ; that the question was not whether the true reading is Ipse or Ipm, but rather fyse, Ipsa or Ipswn, and that whatever read- ing be i)referved, that the text in question. Ipse, Ipsa or Ipsnm conteret caput tuiim, "he, she or it shall crush thy head," has never been quoted as the foundation for the dogma of the Immaculate Concep- The Bishop did not deign to reply, but in his stead Rev. Mr. Daveni)ort, a Ritualist Minister of St. John, undertook the Bishop s defence. The result was a long series of letters which Mr. Quigley has here gathered together in book form under three heads : a Resume, a Reioinder, a Rebutter. We are glad that these letters have thus been permanent)', preserved; for they deserve it. We would have wished that the author had imitated the patient and kindly courtesy of])r Newman's answer to Pusey's "Eirenicon" and avoided all personalities and severe and uncharitable expressions. He seems to have felt it to be a mistake, and towards the end of his lettei^ strives to vindicate his conduct in this legard ; but vve teel his vvork would have been far more convincing and more effective had he kei)t under control all display of feeling. Again, we would have wished to see at least a general index of the letters, and, better still, an index of the exceedingly valuable informp.tion his deep and critical knowledge has thus given to the public. Mr. ]:>aveni)ort did not allow the author to conhne the controversy to the two questions brought forward by the Bishop, but made it embrace the whole subject of Catholic devotion to the Blessed Mother of (iod. Mr. Quigley first took up the various readings. Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, and vindicated the reading of the \ ulgate Ipsa Cnot of the Douay!). It is wonderful what an amount of critical lean'ino- he here displays: Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts, manu- scriiitsrversions, Fathers, scriptural critics — all are summoned to beaf witness to the reading "she" or "it." We do not know where our readers could find this question treated more exhaustively^ or with -reater critical power. The author then shows from the Bull "Ineff'ibilis D'hih" the dogmatic constitution of . the Immaculate Conception, that only the first part of the text is qiioted in support of the dogma, and that no mention at all is made, textually, ot tHe FJiBSS NOTICES. 8 words, " she shall crush thy head." He demonstrates from Catholic theologians that all agree, no matter which of the three readings be adopted, the dogma can be proved as well from either. He then follows the Kitualistic Vicar and answers his objections taken from the "Glories of Mary" and the Raccolta. Here the author is at his best and his vast erudition is displayed — devotion to Mary in all ages, the Intercession of the Saints, the Rule of St. Vincent of Lerins, Littledale's "Plain Reasons," Pusey's "Eirenicon " — are all thoroughly and critically examined. Not only are Wiseman, Newman, Manning, Harper, Passaglia, Ward and Rrownson called to his aid, but leading Anglican theolo- gians and Bishops as well. He passes over no difficulty, and this part of his work is invaluable to the Catholic reader; for it is a veritable arsenal, richly furnished with weapons of every kind to overthrow the enemies of our heavenly (^ueen. We have read the whole volume, not only with pleasure and edification, but we have found it one of the very best we have thus far seen. Mr. Quigley deserves the gratitude of every Catholic, and we hope his publishers will find that^his labors are ap])reciated. We recommend the book cordially to all our readers. In his preface the author says: ^' What I desiderate in Protestant teachers is a knowledge of the Catholic doctrines they attack. In the conscientious discharge of their duties from their standi)oint, they may feel themselves obliged to point out errors (so called) in the doctrines of the Catholic Church. Of this no reasonable man can complain, but for heaven's sake let them first learn exactly what these doctrines are. We will then have less of the wild figments of hysterical imaginations and pandemonium cari- catures of beliefs, in defence of which the mightiest intellects that ever adorned our race have found their highest sphere, and of which genius allied with sanctity have ever been the most persuasive and enthusiastic exponents." * " More Light." This is what those outside the church need. It was this spurred our author on in writing his letters. He wished his Protestant friends to understand the Catholic doctrine of devotion to ]\[ary, the Mother of ( -d. We hope God has blesbed his writings with abundant fruit in New Brunswick. He has sown good seed and the Lord will see that it brings forth abundant fruit. We hope Mr. Quigley will not allow his pen to remain idle, but that he will often use it for the defence of the Church and Catholic truth. He has the talents, the education, the deep reading. We need such laymen. The {London) 3fonth. Ipse, Ijisa: Ipse, Ijysa, Ipsiwi: Which? This volume was occasioned bv a statement made by the Right Rev. Bishop Kingdon in a popular lecture on "Misprints," to the effect that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was based on the substitution of a for e, in the Vulgate rendering of Genesis iii. 15, whereby we read Ipsa for l2)se — ''She shall crush thy head," instead of "//e shall crush thy head." This is of course the sort of thing we niigla expect in a popular lecture of the kind, where accuracy and plain facts have to 4 PRESS NOTICES. make way to some extent for sensation and novelty ; and the state- ment, thou-h probably only the thoughtless utterance of a mind biat^sed by Protestant education, is sufficiently imslemhng to be worthy of public refutation. Mr. (^ui-.ey somewhat destroys the sensational effect bv showing that the choice did not ue only between Ipse and Tpm, since Ipmm had an equal elaiin to consider- ation. He points o.it that .he great majority ot Catholic commen- tators, and many of he most strenuous advocates ot the dogma m question, have held FpHe or Ip.^nm to be the uiore correct rendering. The i.roviiK' force of the text is not to be tound xn the word Ipsa, but in the .H.lion of a perfect antagonism h«-'tween the serpent and the woman, an>glev, LL.B, for a copy of his hooV--Ipse, Ipsa: Ipse, Ipsa Ipsum: Winch/ under which title he has collected the letters published iu_ the_ Gh>be some time areliminary J.etters in the discussion which set forth the views of Rev. Mr. L^aveni.ort I hen follow the letters ook as it now stands, at the learning which it evinces, at the tremendous and untiring research which it displays, at the efteolive mannerin which the author handled his side of the case, the Olohe is graCihed that it was the medium bv which the two eminent disputants made known their views. In i)hicinen to the inspec- tion of the learned world ? Now the doctrine of the Immaculate Concef)tion is not founded on this verse. The doctrine is wholly inde[)(Mident of it. The indirect sujtport which it gives to the doctrine appears in the first clause rather than in the last clause of the verso : '■'•I will put emnities between thee and the vwman — Tnimicitias ponuminter te et mulierem." Where "enmities" are placed l)ei,''een these two persons, it is plainly implied that neither shares in the essential characteristics of the other. Hut siji is the essential characteristic of Satan. Therefore sin is wholly absent from the Blessed Virgin. Even if this verse had never formed a part of the ins|)ired volume, the doctrine would still have constituted from the beginning a j)art of the faith once delivered to the saints, although it has only been defined in an explicit form in modern times. But it may not be without value to define the dogma for the benefit of those who are not sjiecially conversant with theological science. Mr. Quigley quotes Cardinal Newman on this point at l)age 441. I lis Eminence points out in a letter to Dr. Pusey that the doctrine has no reference to the parents of the Blessed Virgin, but relates simply to her own person ; that it does but affirm that together with the nature which she inherited from her parents she had from the first moment of her existence a superadded fulness of grace. As Eve before the fall was clothed in a garment of righte- ousness, so the Blessed Virgin, by a special interposition of divine favor, was created in precisely the same sinless state by reason of the merits of Christ Jesus, the Saviour of the human race. The Evan- gelist, by quoting the statement of the Virgin, sets upon it the seal of truth : "All generations shall call me blessed, for He that is mighty hath magnified'' me." Is it possible to cite any similiar inspired utterance relating to Eve? Can any Christian attribute .o Eve, at any period of her life, a state of sinless purity which he denies to the mother of our Lord? And Luther says : "As other men were con- ceived in sin, both in soul and body, but Christ without sin, either in body or soul, so ]M,ary the Virgin was conceived, according to the body indeed without grace, but according to the soul full of grace. Such is the meaning of these words which the Angel Gabriel spoke to her: '■Blessed art thou amongst women.^ For it could not have been said of her, 'Blessed art thou,' if she had ever been under the curse. It was also right and just that that person should be preserved without sin from whom Christ was to take the flesh that should overcome all sin. For that is properly called ' Blessed,' which is endowed with God's grace, that is, which is without sin." Having defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, it remains to consider whether the formidable indictment which the Coadjutor Bishop has drawn up against the Church is sustained by the arguments and authorities upon which his defender, the Rev. Mr. Davenport, relies. Mr. Quigley's contention in answer to the indictment may be thus defined. He undertakes to prove that the Church is not committed to one reading Ipsa " she," but accepts as of equal authority the reading ''Ipse,'' Christ, or "Ipsum" it -- the PBESS NOTICES. 7 Bee«l, which is Christ. He contends that there is no difference in meaning between these three readings. Now, if in manuscripts, BiWles and commentaries without end, the reading is various— ^'he," "she" o: "it;" it the acknowledged kaders of theological opinion, Protestant and Catholic, adopt all three; if the dogma of the Im- maculate Conception does not rest upon any one of the three but is consistent with them all, then the charge of the Bishop that the Church recognizes one reading only " Ipsa,'' and builds the dogma on that reading alone upon ihe authority of corrupt manuscripts, must be held to be disproved, to state it mildly, at tlie bar of public opinion. Can it be said after an attentive examination of the book that Mr. Quigley has made out his case? He declines, and properly as we think, to confine the discussion to Latin nianuscripts. '^Melius est petere fontes quam sectari rivulos — it is better to_ go to the fountain head than to pursue the course of rivulets," is his rule. Now the Hebrew text is the source. Upon turning to the reference made to Gen. iii. If) by Maimonides, the greatest of all Jewish Scholars, it will be seen that "7;wrt" ".s/te" was the received reading among those who cannot be suspected of a leaning to any form of Christianity. The Hebrew Bible by Plantin, 1572, two editions of the He' rew Bible at Venice, 1776, and several others have "ip««." Arabic and Chaldaic authorities might be added. What ground then remains for the imputation that the Church of Rome has changed "ipse" to ''Ipsa?'" It would appear from the book before us that the Rev. Mr. Davenport made no attemi)t whatever to controvert these statements. The Hebrew manuscripts cast no light upon the read- ing "7/9.s'?m," for there is no neuter gender in the Hebrew language. The Greek and Latin manuscripts were necessarily copied from the Hebrew. Mr. Quigley proves not only from Catholic theologians of the highest eminence, but from Protestant Biblical critics, that the reading in the (4reek manuscripts is various, '-'- autos, ante, auto,'' — "he, she, it." The writers of these manuscripts must ha^-e con- sidered that the Hebrew pronoun was capable of a neuter inter- pretation. . , , . T • ^ To come at length to a consideration of the various Latin read- ings of which the Bishop undertook to speak, the challenge given by Rev. Mr. Davenport d^Mnands our attention. In his first letter (page 11) he asks: "Where, then, is to be found a Latin version oj the mble with 'Ipsum' in this passage?" The challenge was repeated four times. Mr. Quiglev, in answer to it, cited seven Latin Bibles, each of which contained " fysum." Their names are found on pages 101-2, with numerous other authorities. He adds, in a postscript, Bibles and commentaries without end, including the Parisian, London, and minor Polyglots. In No. 3 of Mr. Davenport's last series of letters (p. 368), ignoring Mr. Quigley's full reply to his challenge, he changes his base and says : "It will be remembered that I oot him (Mr. Quigley) to name a manuscript of the Latin Vulgate. . . . which reads ' Ipsum: " Who can remember anything of the kind ? A request to produce a Latin version of the Bible is not the same as a request 8 PRESS NOTICES. to J roducc a manuscript of the Latin Wiltjaie. His demand for a "manuscript" is an adininsion that a LaJn IJible has been produced which sustains Mr. QuiijjU'y's contention. Mr. Davenport must he well aware that .incient manuscripts are guarded with jeah)us care in the arclnves of Kurope, and are not accessible to dwellers on this side of the Atlantic. As Kibles reflect manuscripts, it niust be conceded that JJililes are proof as high as the nature of the case recjuires in su|)por* of "various readings." But that manuscripts containing; ^'- Ipttmn^' actually exist is proved at j>age 105. Mr. Quigley never claimed, and it is wholly immaterial to his argument to claim, that any manuscript of the Vulgate contains " JpsifniP C'ardinal IJellarmine, who himself was one of the revisory of the Vulgate, says: "The Vulgate is various here, for some dices have ^Ipse; some '■Ips(C ; and besides it is not conti-ary to Vul- gate shoidd one be convinced that he ought to read ^fpse' or ^Jpiium.'' " The gravamen of the IJishop's charge was thai while the word '-'■Ipse''' was in the manuscripts from which the Vulgate wao cr ; led, thy Church ha i changed it to "/p.sV in order to sustain a doolrino which was \/ho!iy devoid of truth. Why then challenge Mr. Quigley to prove that the Vulgate co!Uains " Ipmni V " Mr. Quigley has proved his case when he cities other IVibk's and manuscripts to prove that the Church accejits "i)W and '•'■Ipsurn'''' as of equal authority with ^^Jptta,^^ all three having the same meaning for Protestant and Catholic alike. The great Protestant scholars, (^rotius and Tischendorf, sui)port the view that the differer.ce in the readings does not in any respect alter the sense. The Virgin crushes the serpent's head, as St. IJernard says, — "by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incar- nation, and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestion of the enemy to commit even the smallest sin " ; and, in (he words of the Bull I/iefabilis,—^' by that virtue with which she was endued from on high." The Polyglot Bible of the Anglican Bishop Walton, the ^-reatest Polyglot in the world, contains" tpmrn'''' in this })assage. Nothing appears to be wanting in the citations and in the reasoning by which Mr. Quigley sustains his contention that the various reading of Gen. iii. 15, is not ''Ipse,'" '-'/pso'' only— but ''Ipse,'' "Ipsa'' "ipsum.'" But while upon the particular point m controversy, an impartial critic must give judgment in his favor, it must be conceded that he has made use of some expressions which at the first glance seem to exceed the limits of fair comment. "The words of the w5«e are as goads," says Solomon. But a wise man will use his "goads" with discretion. A reference, however, to the occasion of the use of those expressions puts the matter in a very different light. His opponent clearly began the use of language of an objectionable character. He charged the Roman Catholic church with "exaggerated and too often idolatrous devotions offered to her," i. e., the Blessed Virgin (letter of 26th November, 18?^", page 13). Now, we know that olmvifir onrliirfitV) oil thin«'»' Apfl vt't t.bp fihar'tv' of SI Catholic who could endure such a charge with patience could hardly be distin- guished from indifference. The distinction between the adoration I I I PRESS NOTICES. 9 I 1 I paid to the Holy and Undivided Trinity alone, and the worshij) due to the Virgin in clearly n arkod in Catholic theology, and plainly taught froir Catholic pu'pits thn),i to the exciting cause, he would be comi)elled to condemn? According to Dr. Tohnson, it was the use of abusive language by those who rejected tlie authority of the church which led to the mart^yrdom of so many during the Iteformation. " Do you not think it was very hard," said Hoswell, "that the Reformers should have been burned because they did raot believe that bread and wine were changed into the Body and Blood of Christ? "Sir," said Dr. .Tohnson, "they were not burned for re- fusing to believe that bread ai:d wine .vcre changed into the Body and i31ood of Christ, but for iissulting those wl«o did believe it. Be- sides they never intended to be burned. As many of them ran away as c< dd." No one would suspect Lord Byroii of a loaning towards Catholic doctrine. And yet it is sometimes given to men of extraordinary genius, such as he ])ossessed, ' "> attain an intellectual insight into truth with which the general ten f their lives is at variance. The whole Catholic doctrine relating i '^e Virgin is contained in the following jtassage from the Siege of Corinth, Canto xxx.: " Darkly, sternly, and all alone, xfllnrtti ;,too(l o'er the altar stone: Madonna' ^ tace upon lilm shone, PaintCv. in heavenly hues above, With eyes of light and looks of love; And placed upon that holy shrine To tix our thoughts on things divine, When pictured tiiere, we kneeling see ITer, and tlie boy-God on her knee, Sn:iling sweetly en each prayer To Heaven, as if to waft it there." 10 PRESS NOTICES. U])on this question Byron and Cardinal Newman are at one. Hi& E.ninenee says (p. 307) : "It is Mary's prayers that avail, and her prayers are effectual by the^a^ of Him who is our all in all." Finally, with reference to the Invocation of Saints, there does not appear to be any difference in principle between the views of Mr. Quiglev and those of the Ritualistic school in the church of England. The language of the Ritualistic devotional books quoted by Mr. (Quiglev, pages 398-401, differs in no very marked manner from the language of Catholic devotional books. The Ritualists m''st choose this day which they will serve. If Article 22 of the Church of England, which condemns the Invocatiofl of Saints, expresses Gospel truth, then abandon Ritualism, But if it does not, then " Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues" — Rev. xviii. 4. Mr. Quigley may adopt by "accommodation" the language which Baronius applied to himse*lf, "I have trodden the wine press alone." Without the assistance of any learned friends, he has traversed the whole field of Catholic theology. He has examined the original authorities in all the great American libraries — the Astor, Lennox, Harvard, Boston, and that of Georgetown, Washington. He has added to his own extensive collection of books the great works on the subject from Europe. The readers of his work possess in it a golden key with which to unlock the treasures of Biblical and Patristic learning. He has shown that all Catholic doctrines bear the notes of the Vincentian Canon— Antiquity, Universality, Con- sent; that when heresy has risen, the Church has suppressed it by defining what has been the faith from the beginning. The dogma always^existed. Heresy has but drawn it out in an exi)licit form. Thus the Church is ever the same. The addition to the confession of the faith is not an addition to the faith itself. If the result of his efforts shall be to strengthen the faithful, and to comfort the doubt- ful, and to restore the erring, and to remove misconceptions from the minds of those who are without the fold of the Catholic Church, he will not have labored in vain. Philalethes. {From the Saint John Globe.) IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REVIEW BY "PHILALETHES." To the Editor of the Globe : Sir,— In your issue of August 6, 1889, you set down the terms on which you intend to bring the "Ipse, Ipsa" controversy to a close. You offer my opponent specified space for two contributions, and myself a reply of one column in extent. You then add these words: "And no space will be allowed to any other writer upon the subject." My opponent has already sent you two letters on the subject since August 6, 1889. It is my intention, so soon as I can find a moment lor careful examination of the one-sided reprint and its additions, to claim the column offered me. PJiBSS NOTICES. 11 I now enter ray protest against the admission to your paper this evening, under a pretence of reviewing my adversary's book, of a partisan criticism of the controversy, two columns in length, from a Roman Catholic special pleader, who has not the manliness to write over his own name, but signs himself " Philalethes," in which the main questions are re-opened, new matter introduced and actually defence made for the low, scurrilous style of my op)'onent's writing. I must ask you now to show cause why one of my friends should not be allowed to deliver his criticism upon the book, over the name "Veritas "or the English equivalent to "Philalethes," "Lover of Truth?" T do not complain of your own notice of the reprint (Tuesday, Janniii y 27, 1891 ) when acknowledging its presentation to you by its author, but it seems to me most unfair, after what you have said, to re-open your columns, and that to anonymous partisan writers, as you have done to-night. I remain, yours very truly, John M. Davenport, January 30, 1891. Priest of the Church of St. John Baptist. [ Rev. John M. Davenport had the closing word in the discussion, and the discussion closed with his letters. Mr. Quigley did not consider the space offered sufficient to make such reply as he thought he needed to make, and he did not avail himself of it. The two letters of Mr. Quigley, to which Rev. Mr. Davenport refers — if there were two — were no more a part of the "subject" than is this letter which we now cheerfully publish for Mr. Davenport, despite its rasping and ungenerous tone. We do not ieel called upon to plead to any indictment of Mr. Davenport's framing. The Globe had a perfect right to publish anything it pleased in the way of a review of Mr. Quigley's book, as it would of any other book, just as it would of one of Mr. Davenport's if he had published his side of the controversy. One word more. Rev. Mr. Davenport recklessly assumes co know and states without any scruple whatever that the review published in the Globe was written by a Roman Catholic. He could not have had the slightest information on which to base this statement. The Globe does not say who does or who does not write what it publishes. It departs from that rule on the piesent occasion to say that the review was written by a well read scholar in the denomination to which Rev. Mr. Davenport himself belongs.] The ISt. John Daily Sun. More than three years ago Rev. Dr. vingdon, coadjutor-bishop of Fredericton, delivered a lecture in St. John on "Misprints." The subject was apparently innocent, and little likely to excite controversy, especially a religious controversy. Yet it did lead to a lengthy discussion, which was not the less spirited because it was long. i ne UlSpUiautS vVufU IVuV. o-yJim ±r±. jj-avclipvi ., ptivov vs. i-nc Mission church in this city, who has a high reputation for scholar- ship, especially in the field of patristic literature, and generally in 12 FRESS NOTICES. matters of ecclesiastical lore, and Richard F. Quigley, a barrister in this city who was previously known to be a devoted member ot the Roman Catholic communion, much interested in theology, but had not yet made a reputation as a controversialist in theology. Ihe discussion, which was carried on in the columns of the Saint John Globe, continued for many months, the disputants taking ample time for research, and receiving ample space for the marshalling ot their evidence. At the close of the controversy Mr. Quigley gathe.ed together his letters, with so much of those of Mr. Davenport as was needed to explain them, and issued them in permanent form from the printino- house of Fr. Pustet & Co., New York and Cincinnati. He has furnished explanatory notes, supi)lied further refereiK'es to authorities, and added an Appendix containing a letter ot bishop Strossmayer to Bishop Maes pronouncing the Strossmayer sermon, which has often been quoted against the Roman Catholic church, to be a forgery. The Appendix also contains a letter from Bishop Roo-ers of Chatham, and Dr. Lee's criticism of Littledale's "Flam Reasons," which last mentioned work has been extensively used in the discussion. The whole work as published is a solid book ot 471 pacjes, got up in workmanlike style and, so far as Mr. Quigley was in a position to attend to it, carefully edited. Following is the passage in Dr. Kingdon's lecture, as reported, to which Mr. Quigley took exception : Sonietinies the substitution of one letter for another ina.U> a vast differ- ence, and, as an iUustration, he referred to the words //<.sf> and /7).sv^ the latter word in an important passage in the Donay Bible, being the toundation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The passatre referred to is from Genesis iii. 15, rendered in the Protestant vemon— "ii! >^hall bruise (hi/ head;' and in the Douay version, ^^She shall crash thy head^ the latter following the Vulgate — ''Ipsa conteret caput tuumr The statements against which Mr. Quicrley protested were (1) that Ipsa in the Vulgate was a misprint; (2) that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was founded on, or in anyway depended on that reading. He affirmed that the readincr Ipsa is much older th' n the Vulgate; that not only Ipsa and Ipse, but Ipsimi has been used in recognized Latin copies; that the Roman Catholic church has never ])ronounced m favor ot any one ot the three readings or based any doctrine on any one of them; that the Hebrew of the passage in Genesis is ambiguous and may oe correctly rendered in any of the three ways; that the difference in gender makes no difference in the meaning or in the doctrine taught, the Immaculate Conception being set forth as clearly m tlu torm Ipse, or even fysum, as in the form Ipsa. These propositions Mr. Quigley maintains with great force, and on the purely academic questions with undoubted success. With an amount of labor ar-i research which seems almost incredible m a por=on dtnated ns Mr. Ouifflev is, he has examined for himself near- ly all the famous manuscripts and printed texts in the great Ameri- can libraries which can throw light on this question. There is no gainsaying the proof that Ipsa in the Vulgate is not an inadvertent PEESS NOTICES. 13 mis-print or mis-copy, and tnat the doctrine of the Immaculate Con- ception is not founded on a wrong reading. Had the discussion been restricted to the original question at issue, as stated above, the result would have been obvious even lo the c'omparativelv unlearned. The controversy is, however, obscu.ed by many side issues. In nn early stage the charge of idolatry was made against the Roman Catholic church, which was accused of offer- in*^ to the Virgin and to the Saints the worship that belongs to God only. Mr. QuTgley denies and retaliates. He distinguishes between the \vii\\ iionor'xvhich may be worthily paid to the creature, and the adoration due to the Creator alone. Carrying the war into Africa, Mr. Quigley affirms that the charges of idohitry made by IVIr. Daven- port aiigley brings to the theme a devout mind, and a spirit enthusiastic to the verge of rapture. Readers trained in another school of thought, and re- gardincr these doctrines from another standpoint, may not enter into the spint of the author or be persuaded by what ])ersuades him. It was long ago learned that great wrath can exist in celestial minds, and our%,ontr<)versialists have not kept themselves free from bitter- ness. Mr. Quiuley's letters which are particularly the subject of review are blemished by passages of rather violent invf/.tive, by ex- pressions of scorn and words^f contumely. He claims that the provocation is great, as where writers whose works are_ difficult ot access are quoted auainst him, and he finds on investigation that the i>assaoes have been so misquoted as to change the meaning, e.g., in the case of a passage from De Rossi, or where a spurious writing is cited, as the Strossmayer sermon. It is, however, fair to say that Mr Davenport made the amende honorable when the facts were made known to him. There is orthodox precedent for violence m theoluincal discussion, es))ecially if one search the writings ot the great Scholars of the i.iildle ages for examples. The gentle Milton and his adversaries were much more tierce in controversy than either Mr Quioley or Mr. Davenport has ventured, or, let us hope, desired to be. 'I'erhaps when Mr. (Jui