We cannot now discuss this principle, though it might readily be shewn, how experience and all likelihood are against it, and how it is entirely contradicted by the varying picture which is set before us of the first followers of our Lord, in the Gospels, and the Acts; the former representing them, when living in constant intercourse with their Master, and under the immediate power of that example, which was to effect so much, as weak, timid, and inconstant; while the latter describes them as men animated by a new impulse, as fearless of danger or death, and as cheerfully wearing out their lives in the service of him who was no longer with them,-being, as we believe, under an influence stronger than that of any example; an influence unrestricted, either as regards time or place, and which may be as potent now as it was then. But we attempt not to do more than thus state the principles which it is the labour of "Ecce Homo " to establish, and to observe respecting it, that in thus presenting a partial view, it sets forth a gross perversion of the Gospel scheme. Its writer, in the conclusion of the preface to the fifth edition, deprecates condemnation on this ground. But we contend that it is an unfair, and, indeed, an impracticable mode of dealing with Christianity, and that a part of it can no more be justly viewed by itself, than the nature and functions of a branch or a limb could be investigated without respect being had to the tree or the body to which they might belong. The example of the Holy and the Just One is indeed most precious in its place, and when taken in conjunction with the system of truth, of which it is a portion; but, regarded alone, it is deprived of its efficacy. The same may be said as respects any other detached fragment of the great doctrines which centre in Christ; and our objection against "Ecce Homo "is, not that this or that Christian doctrine has no account taken of it, but that the combination of sublime verities, forming God's message of mercy to man, is explained away, as in the case of the Holy Spirit, is unrecognised, or is virtually denied, in the endeavour to shew that it may be done without, or that its end may be accomplished by a different agency.

Such is the volume for which Mr Gladstone offers himself as the apologist. We consider that the plea which he puts forward in its behalf is altogether inapplicable. We do not admit his theory in the extreme form in which he advances it, and we have shewn, that in his eagerness to establish it, he has not been very careful with regard to the facts which are alleged. But had he ever so satisfactorily proved his point, namely, that our Lord ordinarily exhibited himself during his ministry as no more than a divinely commis

The Defence Inapplicable.

589

sioned teacher, this would not justify any such imperfect exhibition of him now; as the peculiar circumstances, which then would have rendered it necessary, no longer exist, and indeed cannot again. The present prevailing condition of human thought and feeling, certainly in no respect corresponds with it; nor, to our view, do its requirements seem likely to be met by such a book as "Ecce Homo," as Mr Gladstone considers that they may. It cannot satisfy the sceptical, who seek proof for what is to be believed; as nothing of the kind is offered. It may possibly be of service to some who believe, by bringing prominently forward truths and duties which may have been insufficiently regarded. But we fear it may have done a far greater amount of mischief, by unsettling the belief of many, or leading them to embrace a view of Christianity which is false. While speaking thus unfavourably of it, we are by no means insensible to its literary merits, and to much in it which, viewed by itself, is excellent. But, taken as a whole, we are constrained to look upon it as a pernicious work, and likely to prove all the more so, owing to the charm of its style, and the plausible aspect which it wears. Gladly would we hope that the fragment, or fragments, yet to be added to it, might place it in a less objectionable light. But the slight shadowing forth of what is to come, towards the close of the volume, does not incline us to suppose that it will be an improvement on what has already appeared.

We regret that it should have found such an eulogist as Mr Gladstone, whose opinion possibly will influence many; though we cannot think it will weigh much with those who take a correct estimate of its value. It may be regarded as no more than one of those fancies, which his clever, but not very judicious, mind is apt to seize, and to advocate, as he does almost everything, to adopt words already used respecting him, "with the zeal of recent conversion;" for nearly every view which he now supports, is in entire opposition to those he formerly as earnestly maintained. We only trust that he may remain faithful to that creed which we would willingly believe him, as regards its essentials at least, still to hold; and that he may not advance yet further on the road, on which, it would appear, he has already set out, judging from the volume we have been considering,-respecting which we would but suggest, that all who may read it, would, before they adopt its views, test for themselves the accuracy of its statements. In thus referring to Mr Gladstone, we are free from bias of any kind; we speak dispassionately, and purely in the interests of truth.

ART. VIII.-German Romanism.

1. Johann Adam Möhler, Ein Lebensbild. Wörner, Regensburg, Manz.

1866.

Von Professor BALTHASAR.

2. Kirchengeschichte. Von JOHANN A. MÖHLER, Herausgegeben von P. B. GAMS. Regensburg, Manz. 1867-8.

GER

YERMAN ROMANISM receded in the sixteenth century, advanced again in the early part of the seventeenth. Not a little of the ground in Southern Germany lost at the Reformation was regained by Jesuit effort and Austrian persistency of aim, aided by the unfortunate confessional estrangement of Lutherans and Calvinists. The Treaty of Westphalia fixed down the territorial differences of Romanism and Protestantism much as they are now, 220 years after that Peace. The royal family of Saxony have since abandoned the Protestant faith, without thereby un-Protestantising their subjects. But while German Romanism has made little external progress for the last two centnries, it has experienced a number of internal shocks. Jansenism, more in its ecclesiastical than in its doctrinal form, more as an advocate of episcopal and metropolitan powers than of a rigid Augustinianism of faith, issued its manifesto in the middle of the last century, in the "Book on the State of the Church," by Febronius, whose real name was Nicolas v. Hontheim, coadjutor-bishop of Treves. The anti-Curialist principles of Febronius were, in the main, patronised by the Empress Maria Theresa and Joseph II., and in the Austrian dominions, German and Italian, with the outlying dependency of Tuscany, the influence of the Hapsburgs was thrown into the scale against the modern assertions of Rome. A succession of influential writers on Church law,— as Ries at Mentz, the two Rieggers, father and son, v. Eybel, and Rautenstrauch at Vienna,-contributed greatly to influence the minds of statesmen in their views. A number of the clergy also shared them; and the Congress of Ems, in 1788, at which were present the four archbishops of Treves, Cologne, Mentz, and Saltzburg, drew up a "Punctation," in which Febronian views were embodied. Principles, which left to Rome a preeminence purely of the Church's assigning, and made him no "Vicar of Christ," with little more than " Patriarchate" dignity, were, of course, most distasteful to the Romish Curia; and jealousy was skilfully fostered among the German bishops, as if the nearer metropolitan sway would practically be far more hard than the distant Papal one. But the influence of the French Revolution was, practically, far more powerful in arresting the progress of Febronianism than any other cause. Jansenism, so weak as to clutch at any ally, had, in France,

Divisions of German Romanism.

591

called in the aid of Liberalism, Liberalism had ended in Revolution, and Revolution had separated Church and State, with not a little of murder of clergy, and of "religious" of either sex, to give additional zest to the confiscation!

Nor can it be denied that the temper of Febronian canonists and clergy was, in the main, not one of zealously earnest men. In them could be hailed no successors of A'Kempis or Tauler. The school was one of morality, not of devotion; and the weakness of Latitudinarianism is felt in the second generation, if it seems to escape notice in the first. The same charge could not be brought against the influence of Sailer, who died bishop of Ratisbon. He and his school were men earnestly bent on the promotion of practical religion, favourable to intercourse with Protestants, and lamenting the confessional differences between devout Christians. Much practical good has doubtless been effected by the writing and the example of such men as Sailer, Feneberg, and Diepenbröck. But none of them shook themselves off from the confusion of justification and sanctification in the formularies and teaching of the Romish Church, and this necessarily greatly limited their influence for good.

A third direction taken by Romanist thought in Germany, was that of such men as Boos, Henhöfer, Lindl, Gossner, and Poschl. These men might be properly classed with Luther, after he had attained to evangelical views of the way of acceptance with God, and before he saw it needful to break with Rome. Some of these men were constrained to leave the Romish communion: none of them would have willingly relinquished it. They laid the chief stress on the preaching of Christ crucified, and therein were at one with the best contemporary German Protestants. But if this could have been, with all its practical consequences, conceded to them in the Church of Rome, they would have remained her zealous, though not her bigoted or exclusive, adherents. A Protestant, holding justification by faith, was nearer and dearer to them. than a Catholic looking for salvation to works. All of them had much of the reproach and even persecution of the cross to undergo.

Still another tendency of German Romanism was represented in such men as Jahn of Vienna, and others like-minded, in whom the influence of Protestant Rationalism took root, more or less thoroughly. But it was far from spreading as wide, or lasting as long, in the Romanist, as in the Protestant Church of Germany.

Different from all these directions of theological thought, and destined to oppose in turn all of them, was the character and the principles of John Adam Möhler. His fame has been

not re-habilitated (it had never died away), but more vividly brought before the contemporary public by the recent publication of the two works whose titles form the heading of this article.

Both of the works are issued by the same writer, Gams, although a large part of the materials of the first were collected and prepared for publication by Möhler's fellow-student and warm friend, Professor Wörner. We are not informed why no public use was made of them in the latter's life-time. On his death in 1861, his literary executors placed them for publication in the present editor's hands. He owns his obligations, in the compiling of the volume, to the assistance of the written communications of Professor Hefele of Tübingen, and to the "Necrology" drawn up, the year of Möhler's death, by Professor Reithmayr of Munich, who also contributed the sketches of Möhler's life and works prefixed to the later editions of the "Symbolik," and inserted in the seventh volume of the Kirchen Lexicon.

Möhler was born on the 6th May 1796, at Igersheim, a village near Mergentheim, on the Tauber, in the extreme north of the kingdom of Wurtemberg. His father was innkeeper and bailiff there; and was only induced, by the strong propensity to learning which the boy showed, to give up his idea of bringing him up to his own business. The Latin school at Mergentheim prepared him for the Lyceum at Ellwangen, where he chiefly distinguished himself in the philosophical class. Thence he repaired to the theological academy in the same place, of the teaching and the practices in which Wörner gives a very depreciatory account. The lecture seem to have been superficial, and the discipline next to none. As contemporaries here, Möhler had, among others, Prince Alexander Hohenlothe, afterwards of miracle-mongering notoriety, and Joseph Wolff, then a Romanist. King William I., of Wurtemberg, soon after his accession, broke up the academy at Ellwangen, and transferred the students to the University of Tübingen. Here there was a far larger circle of students, as all the faculties were represented there; and the Protestant youths freely interchanged communications with the Romanist ones.

Möhler, in the end of the year 1818, exchanged the Tubingen University for the clerical seminary at Rotterburg. His biographer represents him as deriving little benefit from the meagre prelections at either place of instruction. "The spiritual, the priestly element of life, was not recognised; religious depth and inwardness, true delight in faith and noble aspirations, found no room for themselves there."

The experience of these three seminaries influenced Möhler in after life not a little it led him to associate all reforms in the